I am disgusted with our party. I pray to god we get fresh blood in 16

[Toro]

Right word, wrong direction. I gave a simple test, and you failed. Same answer every Democrat gives, it's ridiculous! And no, you can't name one. Wow, using the Communist Manifesto to define a Communist, when I say that out loud even I think I'm nuts...

Well, I guess all of Europe is "Communist" too.

Fail.

Nice try at deflection, I didn't address Europe either way, I addressed Obama. And you still can't name a plank of the Communist Manifesto that Obama opposes. You do a nice shuffle though..

I'll go a little slower for you, since you are lost in the fog of ideological extremism. The policies that Obama and the Democrats have put forward are more in line with the democratic socialist parties of western Europe, not with the Communist parties of the former Soviet states. Ergo, by your logic, if Obama is a communist, so are all of Europe, and probably Canada too. Epic fail.

I mean if you think "Obamacare" or Dodd-Frank are communistic, you're a moron.

 

[Toro]

The "suggestion is pure nonsense," yet ...still zero planks that he opposes.

Trouble with reading comprehension? Tell you what. Go back over the quote from the CM that I posted above, and try to find anything in there that Obama supports, and which is not already part of U.S. law.

Go ahead. I'll wait.

EDIT: Never mind, I know you won't, so here are a few examples that you really should have figured out for yourself.

Abolition of private property
Abolition of land ownership and diversion of all rents to public purposes
A heavy progressive, graduated income tax. (I support this. Obama does not.)
Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Confiscation of the property of all emigrants.
Centralization of credit in the hands of the state.
Nationalization of the media.
Nationalization of means of production.
Establishment of "industrial armies."
Abolition of town and country and distribution of population across the country.

That should do for starters.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hey kaz, show us where Obama is in favour of abolition of all private property, nationalization of the media, nationalization of the "means of production," etc., etc., etc.

So much of the American right is just utterly clueless.

 

[Toro]

Right word, wrong direction. I gave a simple test, and you failed. Same answer every Democrat gives, it's ridiculous! And no, you can't name one. Wow, using the Communist Manifesto to define a Communist, when I say that out loud even I think I'm nuts...

Well, I guess all of Europe is "Communist" too.

Fail.

Wait a minute. You are praising Europe now?

RINO!

No I'm not.

Please stop being stupid.

 

[Mustang]

Bill Bennett knows Newt personally and says he has problems. This gives me pause because I've considered Bennett a respectable man and usually trust his judgment.

I remember Newt as speaker and thought he did a good job. Problem is Bennett says he knows Newt personally and listed a few characteristics that bother me. I got a sense of some of them but just wrote it off as personality glitches when put on the spot. Bill however says they are part of Newts core. Ie self agrandizing and grandiose ideas beyond the ones we have heard about. He thinks as many here have said that if Newt wins the nomination the election will become about his past.

How did our party get relegated to such shitty choices? Obama should be so fucking easy to beat yet at every turn its all about the negativity of our party.

Perry can't debate to save his life. And yes I know were not electing a debater n chief but if he can't sell himself on the stage against Obama the public won't vote for him.

Pauls foreign policy is nuts.

Santorum is too extreme for this election cycle. The country doesn't want to go from far left to far right.

Newt can't outrun his past long enough to talk about current events.

Bachmann just turns me off personally.

Huntsman sounds centered but I honestly don't know anything about the man. And if I don't the public at large won't have a clue.

That leaves Romney, the KING FLIP FLOPPER.


WTF


I like Santorum and Bachmanns ideas but it won't fly in this election so WTF is a person to do? Sitting out or writing in a name is a sheer waste because it could lead to another Obama term. He has to go so I guess I just have to bite my tongue and vote for whoever gets the nomination. This is beginning to feel just like 08 and it straight pisses me off.

I know I'll probably get flamed for this post but I don't care. I don't have a job secure from this shitty economy and I desperately need change.

You ask that question like the answer must indicate that the responsible person or persons is/are someone or some people other than Republicans themselves. That's not the case. Republicans have done this to themselves.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

He is no Marxist. Good grief. Even I'm not a Marxist anymore and haven't been one for decades, and I'm a hell of a lot more radical than he is. That suggestion is pure nonsense.

True.

And adherence to such idiocy will be a contributing factor to Obama’s reelection.

 

[EriktheRed]

The "suggestion is pure nonsense," yet ...still zero planks that he opposes.

Trouble with reading comprehension? Tell you what. Go back over the quote from the CM that I posted above, and try to find anything in there that Obama supports, and which is not already part of U.S. law.

Go ahead. I'll wait.

EDIT: Never mind, I know you won't, so here are a few examples that you really should have figured out for yourself.

Abolition of private property
Abolition of land ownership and diversion of all rents to public purposes
A heavy progressive, graduated income tax. (I support this. Obama does not.)
Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
Confiscation of the property of all emigrants.
Centralization of credit in the hands of the state.
Nationalization of the media.
Nationalization of means of production.
Establishment of "industrial armies."
Abolition of town and country and distribution of population across the country.

That should do for starters.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hey kaz, show us where Obama is in favour of abolition of all private property, nationalization of the media, nationalization of the "means of production," etc., etc., etc.

So much of the American right is just utterly clueless.

kaz...?

 

[kaz]

That should do for starters.

These aren't all "planks." One liberal fallacy frequently used is "Soviets were communists, therefore everything Soviets do is communism."

Abolition of private property - Our system of property taxes accomplishes exactly this as we rent land, cars, other property from the government and own nothing. You don't pay the property tax, they take it away. And the taxes are going up and they are taxing more things. And businesses even moreso. What has Obama done to oppose this?

Abolition of land ownership and diversion of all rents to public purposes - Two words, New London. This is exactly what's happening. What has Obama done to oppose this?

A heavy progressive, graduated income tax. (I support this. Obama does not.) - Of course he does. Show where he as advocated flattening taxes. He endlessly proposes tax the rich.

Abolition of all rights of inheritance. - Again path to it. The death tax is coming back and he's pushing to ensure it does.

Confiscation of the property of all emigrants. - Again a mainstream Democratic policy. Show where Obama has opposed what his fellow Democrats propose.

Centralization of credit in the hands of the state. - Laughable, with the Fed and regulation this is exactly the path he's on.

Nationalization of the media. - Please. His administration has endlessly attacked Fox because they aren't in his pocket like the liberal media and bring up the Fairness doctrine which is a government tool to restrict non-liberal pro government views. What has he done to allow media freedom?

Nationalization of means of production. - LOL, big government growing manipulation of the markets and business though taxes and regulation clearly growing leaps and bounds. What has he done to roll it back? Nothing, he's pushing pedal to the floor.

Establishment of "industrial armies." - What policy or position are you referring to that he's opposed this?

Abolition of town and country and distribution of population across the country. - Ditto.

In none of these could you give an Obama policy or position which is counter to them. You just wave your hand and say he can't believe these. The guy is freaking President and you can't come up with a single thing he actually does or pushes that is clearly counter to Communist. All you can say is that he's not there yet. You have zero.

 

[kaz]

Hey kaz, show us where Obama is in favour of abolition of all private property, nationalization of the media, nationalization of the "means of production," etc., etc., etc.

I responded to his post and these points, but note your argument. You guys are politically active. You follow politics closely. You jump in and scoff when I say he's a Marxist. Yet when I ask you for policies your great leader has which are clearly counter to Communist, you have to sit on our asses and say "show me" where this or that policy is Communist. If he's not a Communist, that should be simple for you. You guys are tag teaming me and citing the Manifesto, yet none of you can answer my simple question. Show actual policies or positions of his which are not Marxist. Yet none of you can do it. You're clearly showing my point.

 

[kaz]

kaz...?

My God. He wrote the post at 3pm on New Years Eve and now it's 8:45 New Years morning and I'm responding to it. Get a life, Man.

 

[kaz]

I'll go a little slower for you, since you are lost in the fog of ideological extremism

You think you're so intelligent, yet you don't know how to use terms. I'll go slow for you on this.

Being an "ideologue" would mean to be advancing an ideology. I'm calling Obama a Marxist. That isn't an ideology and it could mean that I believe in any number of ideologies to do it. I could be a libertarian, which I am. I could also be a fascist or a social conservative, which I'm not. But to be lost in a "fog of ideology" I would actually have to be stating an ideology. You always say that when I criticize your great leader and it always cracks me up.

 

[Truthseeker420]

I'll go a little slower for you, since you are lost in the fog of ideological extremism

You think you're so intelligent, yet you don't know how to use terms. I'll go slow for you on this.

Being an "ideologue" would mean to be advancing an ideology. I'm calling Obama a Marxist. That isn't an ideology and it could mean that I believe in any number of ideologies to do it. I could be a libertarian, which I am. I could also be a fascist or a social conservative, which I'm not. But to be lost in a "fog of ideology" I would actually have to be stating an ideology. You always say that when I criticize your great leader and it always cracks me up.

Calling Obama a Marxist is code word for right wing sheep bigotry meaning I don't like you because you are brown and want to help poor and working people.

 

[kaz]

you are brown

Sure, asshole. I'm OK with white liberals. Accusing people of being racist is code word for that you have no brain in your head to support your views and no dick in your pants to stand behind them.

 

[JoeB131]

Calling Obama a Marxist is code word for right wing sheep bigotry meaning I don't like you because you are brown and want to help poor and working people.

Speaking as a working person, I don't think I can use any more of Obama's help, thank you very much.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Calling Obama a Marxist is code word for right wing sheep bigotry meaning I don't like you because you are brown and want to help poor and working people.

Speaking as a working person, I don't think I can use any more of Obama's help, thank you very much.

Yeah because it is Obama's fault the economy crashed under Bush.

 

[JoeB131]

Calling Obama a Marxist is code word for right wing sheep bigotry meaning I don't like you because you are brown and want to help poor and working people.

Speaking as a working person, I don't think I can use any more of Obama's help, thank you very much.

Yeah because it is Obama's fault the economy crashed under Bush.

NO, it's Obama's fault that he failed to create policies that encouraged growth after a crash.

Crashes happen. They are part of the eb and flow of the economy. Heck, this is fifth recession I've lived through. You have a crash, the deck gets reshuffled, everyone moves on. But this time, Obama has just imposed one stupid policy after another that keeps us from moving forward.

You're business is struggling? Here's a huge new health care mandate to make employing people more expensive! Rely on cheap oil to run your company? Well, I'll start a war in Libya that will jack up the price for a year! And here's a slew of new regulations you have to comply with... Ummm, errr, why are you packing up your shit and moving to China?

When the CEO of Coke says a communist dictatorship has a more business friendly environment than the US, that should be a big red flag we have a problem.

Which is obvious to everyone but Barry...

 

[Toro]

I'll go a little slower for you, since you are lost in the fog of ideological extremism

You think you're so intelligent, yet you don't know how to use terms. I'll go slow for you on this.

Being an "ideologue" would mean to be advancing an ideology. I'm calling Obama a Marxist. That isn't an ideology and it could mean that I believe in any number of ideologies to do it. I could be a libertarian, which I am. I could also be a fascist or a social conservative, which I'm not. But to be lost in a "fog of ideology" I would actually have to be stating an ideology. You always say that when I criticize your great leader and it always cracks me up.

No, being an ideologue means believing deeply in an ideology, not necessarily advancing one. You're a ideologue because you're an ideologue. And because you are, it impairs your judgement, which is why you think Obama is a Marxist and you think me calling you an ideologue makes me a supporter of Obama. Ideology clouds judgement, so you see the world through a fog of ideology. The stronger the beliefs, the thicker the fog.

Many in the American Right wouldn't know communism or Marxism or whatever you want to call it if walked up to them and bit them on the ass. It's a shrill hysterical tool born of ignorance used to bludgeon political opponents.

Here's a clue for you. Central tenants of communism are the abolition of private property and the application of Marx's Labor Theory of Value. Obama told you to buy stocks in May 2009, a very prescient call by the way.

Obama Says Buy Stocks Now: Good Deals There for Long-Term Investors - US News and World Report

Communists abolish stock exchanges, they don't exhort their citizens to buy shares of ownership in companies. Marx's Labor Theory of Value holds that hiring someone is exploitation. In a Marxist worldview, American corporations are the epitome of the exploitation of labor. So it should be pretty obvious to someone not lost in a thick fog of extremist libertarian ideology that President Obama encouraging people to buy stocks is about as far away from Marxist ideology as one can be.

The legislation Obama has passed is generally consistent with what we know of as social democrat parties in Europe. That's why if we consistently apply your silly accusation towards Obama to the rest of the world, well, most of the rest of the world is Communist too. That's only true in ideological extremist fairytale LaLaLand.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Speaking as a working person, I don't think I can use any more of Obama's help, thank you very much.

Yeah because it is Obama's fault the economy crashed under Bush.

NO, it's Obama's fault that he failed to create policies that encouraged growth after a crash.

Crashes happen. They are part of the eb and flow of the economy. Heck, this is fifth recession I've lived through. You have a crash, the deck gets reshuffled, everyone moves on. But this time, Obama has just imposed one stupid policy after another that keeps us from moving forward.

You're business is struggling? Here's a huge new health care mandate to make employing people more expensive! Rely on cheap oil to run your company? Well, I'll start a war in Libya that will jack up the price for a year! And here's a slew of new regulations you have to comply with... Ummm, errr, why are you packing up your shit and moving to China?

When the CEO of Coke says a communist dictatorship has a more business friendly environment than the US, that should be a big red flag we have a problem.

Which is obvious to everyone but Barry...

That's not true, the stimulus created about 3 million jobs( and the GOP cried about the size), Obama signed into place regulations that restore some confidence back into investing, then the the Republicans took the house and have blocked any recovery unless it benefits the rich.

Yeah I'm going to take take political advice from someone's who's main goal is to sell us sugar water with drugs .

 

[JoeB131]

That's not true, the stimulus created about 3 million jobs( and the GOP cried about the size), Obama signed into place regulations that restore some confidence back into investing, then the the Republicans took the house and have blocked any recovery unless it benefits the rich.

Yeah I'm going to take take political advice from someone's who's main goal is to sell us sugar water with drugs .

Aaaaahhh, save me from STUPID PEOPLE.

Stimulus is make-work jobs. All it really did was allow the states to not have to fire useless government workers for a while.

It didn't create commerce, it didn't create manufacturing. It created maybe a few private sector jobs for those companies lucky enough to get a contract.

Government needs to ENCOURAGE private sector growth. Obama has done nothing to do that. He's just grown government.

 

[kaz]

No, being an ideologue means believing deeply in an ideology, not necessarily advancing one

And when I call Obama a Marxist, what ideology does that indicate I believe in? Whether or not I "advance" my cause, my calling Obama a Marxist tells you nothing about my own views other then they aren't left. It says nothing about what I believe at all. Ideology is by definition a belief. You just like the sound of the word and your spin makes it all the funnier.

You're a ideologue because you're an ideologue

Yep, as deep as it gets for you.

Obama Says Buy Stocks Now: Good Deals There for Long-Term Investors - US News and World Report

And on the question, so the best you can come up with on his actual policies are not Marxist is rhetoric in a speech which means nothing in terms of his policies, which actually disincent the rhetoric you cited in this speech. Check and mate, Mate.

 

[EriktheRed]

No, being an ideologue means believing deeply in an ideology, not necessarily advancing one

And when I call Obama a Marxist, what ideology does that indicate I believe in? Whether or not I "advance" my cause, my calling Obama a Marxist tells you nothing about my own views other then they aren't left. It says nothing about what I believe at all. Ideology is by definition a belief. You just like the sound of the word and your spin makes it all the funnier.

You're a ideologue because you're an ideologue

Yep, as deep as it gets for you.

Obama Says Buy Stocks Now: Good Deals There for Long-Term Investors - US News and World Report

And on the question, so the best you can come up with on his actual policies are not Marxist is rhetoric in a speech which means nothing in terms of his policies, which actually disincent the rhetoric you cited in this speech. Check and mate, Mate.

Holy crap, you are a real piece of work!