Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Is America Ruled By A Socialist?
so·cial·ism
/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
Noun
A political and economic theory of that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated...
(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.
No, he's "declared war" on pollution and energy dependence on foreign countries.
He's putting the conserve in conservative.
LOL, you are really funny wytchey. By not allowing the use of our energy supplies he is making us MORE dependent on foregn countries. .
Here's more evidence of how embarassingly stupid you are:
The shale revolution sweeping the U.S. helped push oil production in the world's largest economy to a record last year, BP said in a report this week, underscoring expectations of the nation's energy independence.
In a statistical review of energy demand in 2012, the U.S., the world's third-largest oil producer, said energy production rose 1.3 percent to 15 percent of the global total. A bounty of shale and natural gas helped energy supplies set record for the third straight year, according to BP.
U.S. production of natural gas surged nearly 5 percent last year, BP said. It is now the largest producer of the gas, with 20 percent of the global total, as well as the biggest consumer of both natural gas and crude oil.
The U.S. saw "the biggest increase in oil and gas production of all the countries in the world," BP Chief Economist Christof Ruhl told CNBC's "Squawk Box" this week. "This was the biggest increase in oil production in the entire history" of the country, he said, adding that much of that was on the back of the shale boom.
US Energy Production Growing by Leaps and Bounds: BP
Stop making an ass of yourself. Please.
Is America Ruled By A Socialist?
Obviously not.
Here's what socialism means:
so·cial·ism
/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
Noun
A political and economic theory of that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated...
(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.
Here's what the PRIVATE ownership of American production looks like in part
source =http://www.infohow.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Corporate-Connections.jpg
One would have to be either MENTALLY RETARDED or a great big fat, lying, right wing asshole to continue to think that this nation or any of its elected leaders are socialists.
The Keystone pipeline might create a few jobs but it would be an environmental disaster. Probably why the Canadians want to pump that shit all the way to the gulf. As for reducing the price of gas in America, dream on. Oil is a global commodity and its price fluctuates on global supply. This wouldn't even make a dent.
bullshit, bullshit, and bullshit. the country is already criss crossed with pipelines, the alaska pipeline has been problem free for years.
the ignorance of you liberals is put on display daily, what a bunch of buffoons.
Do you have any fucking idea how nasty this stuff is? Even if it ran trouble free for it's lifetime, the byproducts that come from the refining process are toxic as he'll. Where do you propose they dispose of them? The gulf?
This kind of short term black and white 'thinking' is why you conturds are laughing stocks all over the civilized world.
Where's the socialism in the ACA, specifically?
The end result of obamacare will be single payer government run medicine. That was always the goal. In a very short time the insurance companies will be put out of business because people will realize that paying the penalty will be cheaper than buying insurance.
The illogic of the above is stunning. The insurance companies will be put out of business by people who currently don't have insurance anyway?
lol good one.
The end result of obamacare will be single payer government run medicine. That was always the goal. In a very short time the insurance companies will be put out of business because people will realize that paying the penalty will be cheaper than buying insurance.
The illogic of the above is stunning. The insurance companies will be put out of business by people who currently don't have insurance anyway?
lol good one.
OK, think this through slowly, you might get it.
you can buy an insurance policy for $500/month, or you can pay the penalty of $3500/year and get "free" obamacare from the exchange.
let me help: $500 a month equals $6000 a year. $6000 is more than $3500. So what will most people do?
.
The illogic of the above is stunning. The insurance companies will be put out of business by people who currently don't have insurance anyway?
lol good one.
OK, think this through slowly, you might get it.
you can buy an insurance policy for $500/month, or you can pay the penalty of $3500/year and get "free" obamacare from the exchange.
let me help: $500 a month equals $6000 a year. $6000 is more than $3500. So what will most people do?
.
Since that is not how it works, it is you who needs to do some thinking.
OK, think this through slowly, you might get it.
you can buy an insurance policy for $500/month, or you can pay the penalty of $3500/year and get "free" obamacare from the exchange.
let me help: $500 a month equals $6000 a year. $6000 is more than $3500. So what will most people do?
.
Since that is not how it works, it is you who needs to do some thinking.
Wrong, that is EXACTLY how it will work, that was the long range plan of the dem/libs all along, destroy the evil insurance industry because it employs people and makes evil profit, and turn our medical care over to the same idiots who are running social security and the post office.
Where's the socialism in the ACA, specifically?
The end result of obamacare will be single payer government run medicine. That was always the goal. In a very short time the insurance companies will be put out of business because people will realize that paying the penalty will be cheaper than buying insurance.
The illogic of the above is stunning. The insurance companies will be put out of business by people who currently don't have insurance anyway?
lol good one.
Amusing, and a bit puzzling, that at this late stage, and long after the hallmark "...you didn't build that....," almost daily some apologist writes that Obama certainly isn't a socialist.
Yeah, he is.
1. How can that even open to question???
2. As far back as 2001, in a radio interview on WBEZ, 'senior lecturer Obama' made his socialist intentions clear. In this tour-de-Marx performance- one which never made it into the mainstream media, he used these phrases:
"Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth"...."coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change...."
2001 Obama WBEZ Interview Redistribution Wealth Warren Court - YouTube
Turns out 'redistributive change' became 'hope and change.'
a. "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody" Oct. 12, 2008.
Hard to believe that the public was less concerned about whether the next President was a Marxist than if Joe was a licensed plumber.
b. "Obama could not have been clearer about his intentions to replace what he denigrated as the old "right-wing," "individualistic bootstrap myth" with a collectivist order- pure Marx." Diana West, "American Betrayal," p. 29.
3. So...why no effect on voters? When, exactly, did apathy and the laughter become a kind of conditioned response that short-circuit actual thinking. Hard to imagine how "yawn and mock" trump anti-American subversion.
Must have been just after everyone got the memo "It's different this time."
4. "...Obama's radical past seems to be making no impact whatsoever among the American public. His connection to communists in particular, from communist-terrorists like Bill Ayers to the communist agitator-journalist Frank Marshall Davis to fellow travelers like Saul Alinsky, has simply failed to resonate beyond the political right....
Americans are painfully vulnerable to repeat mistakes that should have been forever tossed onto the ash-heap of history..... The problem is that it isn't being taught. Consequently, Americans today do not know why communism is such a devastating ideology, at both the level of plain economic theory and in actual historical practice. It is a remarkably hateful system, based on literal hatred and targeted annihilation of entire classes and groups of people. (Nazism sought genocide based on ethnicity; communism sought genocide based on class.)" Archived-Articles: Why Obama's Communist Connections Are Not Headlines
5.But...to the point:
"... to a Brit who has seen his fair share of socialists and
lives in a socialist country run by a self-described socialist party by a self-described socialist prime minister who has taken over for another self-described socialist prime minister, it is puzzling why self-described independents ... are doing backflips in an attempt to avoid the obvious fact -- President Obama is quite clearly a socialist.
All these verbal gymnastics that are used to avoid stating the obvious may be rather humorous for someone watching from over the Atlantic, but for Americans, such delusion is a very serious matter.
It is important, not just for the American right, but for the American people as a whole, to realise just exactly who it is they have elected to office.
To call someone a socialist is not conspiratorial, and it is not fear-mongering; it is simply the truth, and it is time for some in the conservative media to take a deep breath and admit it -- America has a socialist leading the country. Welcome to the club: It stinks!"
Archived-Articles: Obama's Socialism
My speculation is that the have-your-cake-and-eat-it crowd would like to be able to brag that they voted for a President who is a first, in so very many ways...
......but don't want to admit that they've imposed socialism on this once great nation.
Smell the coffee.
Amusing, and a bit puzzling, that at this late stage, and long after the hallmark "...you didn't build that....," almost daily some apologist writes that Obama certainly isn't a socialist.
Yeah, he is.
1. How can that even open to question???
2. As far back as 2001, in a radio interview on WBEZ, 'senior lecturer Obama' made his socialist intentions clear. In this tour-de-Marx performance- one which never made it into the mainstream media, he used these phrases:
"Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth"...."coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change...."
2001 Obama WBEZ Interview Redistribution Wealth Warren Court - YouTube
Turns out 'redistributive change' became 'hope and change.'
a. "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody" Oct. 12, 2008.
Hard to believe that the public was less concerned about whether the next President was a Marxist than if Joe was a licensed plumber.
b. "Obama could not have been clearer about his intentions to replace what he denigrated as the old "right-wing," "individualistic bootstrap myth" with a collectivist order- pure Marx." Diana West, "American Betrayal," p. 29.
3. So...why no effect on voters? When, exactly, did apathy and the laughter become a kind of conditioned response that short-circuit actual thinking. Hard to imagine how "yawn and mock" trump anti-American subversion.
Must have been just after everyone got the memo "It's different this time."
4. "...Obama's radical past seems to be making no impact whatsoever among the American public. His connection to communists in particular, from communist-terrorists like Bill Ayers to the communist agitator-journalist Frank Marshall Davis to fellow travelers like Saul Alinsky, has simply failed to resonate beyond the political right....
Americans are painfully vulnerable to repeat mistakes that should have been forever tossed onto the ash-heap of history..... The problem is that it isn't being taught. Consequently, Americans today do not know why communism is such a devastating ideology, at both the level of plain economic theory and in actual historical practice. It is a remarkably hateful system, based on literal hatred and targeted annihilation of entire classes and groups of people. (Nazism sought genocide based on ethnicity; communism sought genocide based on class.)" Archived-Articles: Why Obama's Communist Connections Are Not Headlines
5.But...to the point:
"... to a Brit who has seen his fair share of socialists and
lives in a socialist country run by a self-described socialist party by a self-described socialist prime minister who has taken over for another self-described socialist prime minister, it is puzzling why self-described independents ... are doing backflips in an attempt to avoid the obvious fact -- President Obama is quite clearly a socialist.
All these verbal gymnastics that are used to avoid stating the obvious may be rather humorous for someone watching from over the Atlantic, but for Americans, such delusion is a very serious matter.
It is important, not just for the American right, but for the American people as a whole, to realise just exactly who it is they have elected to office.
To call someone a socialist is not conspiratorial, and it is not fear-mongering; it is simply the truth, and it is time for some in the conservative media to take a deep breath and admit it -- America has a socialist leading the country. Welcome to the club: It stinks!"
Archived-Articles: Obama's Socialism
My speculation is that the have-your-cake-and-eat-it crowd would like to be able to brag that they voted for a President who is a first, in so very many ways...
......but don't want to admit that they've imposed socialism on this once great nation.
Smell the coffee.
No, but I 'see' the RED SCARE. How about you, do you see the bias in favor of corporations by the gang of five (Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito)?
Was it Mussolini who said, "Fascism is the union of corporation and state"?
The greater threat to the American political landscape may be on the Supreme Court Bench. Individual liberty always seems to fade while corporate rights grow.
OK, think this through slowly, you might get it.
you can buy an insurance policy for $500/month, or you can pay the penalty of $3500/year and get "free" obamacare from the exchange.
let me help: $500 a month equals $6000 a year. $6000 is more than $3500. So what will most people do?
.
Since that is not how it works, it is you who needs to do some thinking.
Wrong, that is EXACTLY how it will work, that was the long range plan of the dem/libs all along, destroy the evil insurance industry because it employs people and makes evil profit, and turn our medical care over to the same idiots who are running social security and the post office.
Since that is not how it works, it is you who needs to do some thinking.
Wrong, that is EXACTLY how it will work, that was the long range plan of the dem/libs all along, destroy the evil insurance industry because it employs people and makes evil profit, and turn our medical care over to the same idiots who are running social security and the post office.
No, this is not how it works.
Youve encased your head in partisan concrete, and believe only the lies about the ACA found in rightist dogma.
Amusing, and a bit puzzling, that at this late stage, and long after the hallmark "...you didn't build that....," almost daily some apologist writes that Obama certainly isn't a socialist.
Yeah, he is.
1. How can that even open to question???
2. As far back as 2001, in a radio interview on WBEZ, 'senior lecturer Obama' made his socialist intentions clear. In this tour-de-Marx performance- one which never made it into the mainstream media, he used these phrases:
"Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth"...."coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change...."
2001 Obama WBEZ Interview Redistribution Wealth Warren Court - YouTube
Turns out 'redistributive change' became 'hope and change.'
a. "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody" Oct. 12, 2008.
Hard to believe that the public was less concerned about whether the next President was a Marxist than if Joe was a licensed plumber.
b. "Obama could not have been clearer about his intentions to replace what he denigrated as the old "right-wing," "individualistic bootstrap myth" with a collectivist order- pure Marx." Diana West, "American Betrayal," p. 29.
3. So...why no effect on voters? When, exactly, did apathy and the laughter become a kind of conditioned response that short-circuit actual thinking. Hard to imagine how "yawn and mock" trump anti-American subversion.
Must have been just after everyone got the memo "It's different this time."
4. "...Obama's radical past seems to be making no impact whatsoever among the American public. His connection to communists in particular, from communist-terrorists like Bill Ayers to the communist agitator-journalist Frank Marshall Davis to fellow travelers like Saul Alinsky, has simply failed to resonate beyond the political right....
Americans are painfully vulnerable to repeat mistakes that should have been forever tossed onto the ash-heap of history..... The problem is that it isn't being taught. Consequently, Americans today do not know why communism is such a devastating ideology, at both the level of plain economic theory and in actual historical practice. It is a remarkably hateful system, based on literal hatred and targeted annihilation of entire classes and groups of people. (Nazism sought genocide based on ethnicity; communism sought genocide based on class.)" Archived-Articles: Why Obama's Communist Connections Are Not Headlines
5.But...to the point:
"... to a Brit who has seen his fair share of socialists and
lives in a socialist country run by a self-described socialist party by a self-described socialist prime minister who has taken over for another self-described socialist prime minister, it is puzzling why self-described independents ... are doing backflips in an attempt to avoid the obvious fact -- President Obama is quite clearly a socialist.
All these verbal gymnastics that are used to avoid stating the obvious may be rather humorous for someone watching from over the Atlantic, but for Americans, such delusion is a very serious matter.
It is important, not just for the American right, but for the American people as a whole, to realise just exactly who it is they have elected to office.
To call someone a socialist is not conspiratorial, and it is not fear-mongering; it is simply the truth, and it is time for some in the conservative media to take a deep breath and admit it -- America has a socialist leading the country. Welcome to the club: It stinks!"
Archived-Articles: Obama's Socialism
My speculation is that the have-your-cake-and-eat-it crowd would like to be able to brag that they voted for a President who is a first, in so very many ways...
......but don't want to admit that they've imposed socialism on this once great nation.
Smell the coffee.
No, but I 'see' the RED SCARE. How about you, do you see the bias in favor of corporations by the gang of five (Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito)?
Was it Mussolini who said, "Fascism is the union of corporation and state"?
The greater threat to the American political landscape may be on the Supreme Court Bench. Individual liberty always seems to fade while corporate rights grow.
"Was it Mussolini who said, "Fascism is the union of corporation and state"?"
Perhaps it was Franklin Roosevelt.
"English and French commentators routinely depicted Roosevelt as akin to Mussolini. A more specific reason why, in 1933, the New Deal was often compared with Fascism was that with the help of a massive propaganda campaign, Italy had transitioned from a liberal free-market system to a state-run corporatist one. And corporatism was considered by elitists and intellectuals as the perfect response to the collapse of the liberal free-market economy, as was the national self-sufficiency of the Stalinist Soviet Union.
The National Recovery Administration was comparable to Mussolinis corporatism as both had state control without actual expropriation of private property."
Schivelbusch, "Three New Deals."
You shouldn't be afraid to read a book once in a while.
LOL, you are really funny wytchey. By not allowing the use of our energy supplies he is making us MORE dependent on foregn countries. .
Here's more evidence of how embarassingly stupid you are:
The shale revolution sweeping the U.S. helped push oil production in the world's largest economy to a record last year, BP said in a report this week, underscoring expectations of the nation's energy independence.
In a statistical review of energy demand in 2012, the U.S., the world's third-largest oil producer, said energy production rose 1.3 percent to 15 percent of the global total. A bounty of shale and natural gas helped energy supplies set record for the third straight year, according to BP.
U.S. production of natural gas surged nearly 5 percent last year, BP said. It is now the largest producer of the gas, with 20 percent of the global total, as well as the biggest consumer of both natural gas and crude oil.
The U.S. saw "the biggest increase in oil and gas production of all the countries in the world," BP Chief Economist Christof Ruhl told CNBC's "Squawk Box" this week. "This was the biggest increase in oil production in the entire history" of the country, he said, adding that much of that was on the back of the shale boom.
US Energy Production Growing by Leaps and Bounds: BP
Stop making an ass of yourself. Please.
All of that increase happened on Private Land.
On Federal Land (and water) Oil production has nose-dived.
Here's more evidence of how embarassingly stupid you are:
The shale revolution sweeping the U.S. helped push oil production in the world's largest economy to a record last year, BP said in a report this week, underscoring expectations of the nation's energy independence.
In a statistical review of energy demand in 2012, the U.S., the world's third-largest oil producer, said energy production rose 1.3 percent to 15 percent of the global total. A bounty of shale and natural gas helped energy supplies set record for the third straight year, according to BP.
U.S. production of natural gas surged nearly 5 percent last year, BP said. It is now the largest producer of the gas, with 20 percent of the global total, as well as the biggest consumer of both natural gas and crude oil.
The U.S. saw "the biggest increase in oil and gas production of all the countries in the world," BP Chief Economist Christof Ruhl told CNBC's "Squawk Box" this week. "This was the biggest increase in oil production in the entire history" of the country, he said, adding that much of that was on the back of the shale boom.
US Energy Production Growing by Leaps and Bounds: BP
Stop making an ass of yourself. Please.
All of that increase happened on Private Land.
On Federal Land (and water) Oil production has nose-dived.
Setting aside the fact that you are wrong,
Since that is not how it works, it is you who needs to do some thinking.
Wrong, that is EXACTLY how it will work, that was the long range plan of the dem/libs all along, destroy the evil insurance industry because it employs people and makes evil profit, and turn our medical care over to the same idiots who are running social security and the post office.
No, this is not how it works.
Youve encased your head in partisan concrete, and believe only the lies about the ACA found in rightist dogma.
No, but I 'see' the RED SCARE. How about you, do you see the bias in favor of corporations by the gang of five (Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito)?
Was it Mussolini who said, "Fascism is the union of corporation and state"?
The greater threat to the American political landscape may be on the Supreme Court Bench. Individual liberty always seems to fade while corporate rights grow.
"Was it Mussolini who said, "Fascism is the union of corporation and state"?"
Perhaps it was Franklin Roosevelt.
"English and French commentators routinely depicted Roosevelt as akin to Mussolini. A more specific reason why, in 1933, the New Deal was often compared with Fascism was that with the help of a massive propaganda campaign, Italy had transitioned from a liberal free-market system to a state-run corporatist one. And corporatism was considered by elitists and intellectuals as the perfect response to the collapse of the liberal free-market economy, as was the national self-sufficiency of the Stalinist Soviet Union.
The National Recovery Administration was comparable to Mussolinis corporatism as both had state control without actual expropriation of private property."
Schivelbusch, "Three New Deals."
You shouldn't be afraid to read a book once in a while.
You didn't comment on the recent opinions by the gang of five?
FDR - much like President Obama - was elected at a time of economic crisis and no map existed on how to respond. Both tired some things that worked and others that didn't.
FDR put people to work and food in their stomachs. He fought the same people whose self interest came before the country and their fellow citizens. The Callous Conservative isn't a new breed, it existed decades before you were born and joined their klan.
Read a book is a rather weak ad hominem PC; you're usually more profane and caustic.
