Some are still in the dark on Obama

Thomas Jefferson said:
And your "solution" to this is Romney? Please Dixie, if you honestly believe all this, voting for Romney will assuredly NOT fix these problems. You paraded up and down the street in support when Bush was paving the way for Obama. What makes you think Romney will abdicate any sort of power precedent?
Click to expand...

Allow me to explain the facts of life to you in the easiest terms I can think of for you to comprehend.

At this point, there is only one man on the face of the earth who can legitimately prevent Barack Obama from having another 4 years as president. That would be, Willard Mittens Romney, like him or not. If Obama wins re-election, the America you once knew and loved, along with the Constitution as you've come to know it, will be forever gone. Now, you may wish to remain "in the dark" about Obama, and not believe a word I have said, but the proof is in what Obama says and what he has done thus far. In 2008, when people said Obama was a socialist, they were hooted down as 'extremists' blowing smoke out their ass, but now we see that every policy, every idea, every thought process, is right out of the Karl Marx playbook, and there can be no reasonable question as to where Obama is 'leading' the country.

....but, you are still in the dark.... mired in some kind of bitter unresolved beef with past politicians, who no one can ever do anything about as long as we live, no matter how bitter you get or how much vitriol you spew. In short, you are quite a pathetic man.
 
The President is elected to do a job. When you take a taxi do you drive or does the cab owner/driver drive? Obama is driving and he's driving to where the majority of the population wants to go which isn't in the ditch where the Repubs took the folks.
Click to expand...

You should seriously take a government class, I honestly don't think the role of the President of the United States is like a taxi cab driver. Sorry.

If Bush drove us into the ditch, then Obama has driven us down the ditch to a ravine, where he now has pedal to the medal heading for a gigantic cliff. Seriously.... I would avoid the car analogies altogether this time, just sayin'.

Dixie, you're one strange dude. Preventing the unnecessary deaths of citizens is not "virtually anything". What is the point of the government providing defence and promoting the blessings of liberty if it does nothing while thousands of citizens die every year from illnesses that can be prevented/controlled? Are you arguing the government's obligations to the citizens are to form the perfect union, provide for defence, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty but do nothing when 45,000 of those citizens are dying, every year, from a preventable cause? Why would the government help the citizens secure the blessings of liberty but let them die needlessly? What is your definition of "general welfare"? Obviously it's not life so I'd like to know what you think it is.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing moron, no matter what government does, there will still be people who die every year from illness that can be prevented or controlled. There is no way for government or society to prevent this from happening, unfortunately. We have to let people make their own decisions and choices regarding their own health, and if they make poor choices, they could die.... that is a fact of life we have to live with in a free and open society. There is no societal system which ensures that all persons have adequate health care and illness is prevented for all. That universe only exists in Liberal Utopia, and we simply can't afford to try and fund Liberal Utopia.
 
Dixie said:
...At this point, there is only one man on the face of the earth who can legitimately prevent Barack Obama from having another 4 years as president. That would be, Willard Mittens Romney, like him or not...
Click to expand...

Remember when Spermin' Herman Cain was your idea of "only one man on the face of the earth who can legitimately prevent Barack Obama from having another 4 years"?

Cain ran on not being Obama and lost.
 
Dixie said:
You should seriously take a government class, I honestly don't think the role of the President of the United States is like a taxi cab driver. Sorry.

If Bush drove us into the ditch, then Obama has driven us down the ditch to a ravine, where he now has pedal to the medal heading for a gigantic cliff. Seriously.... I would avoid the car analogies altogether this time, just sayin'.
Click to expand...

Considering you just bought/checked out cars I thought you might be able to relate to a car analogy. For some reason I always think you're much brighter than you really are. Sorry. :(

Here's the thing moron, no matter what government does, there will still be people who die every year from illness that can be prevented or controlled. There is no way for government or society to prevent this from happening, unfortunately. We have to let people make their own decisions and choices regarding their own health, and if they make poor choices, they could die.... that is a fact of life we have to live with in a free and open society. There is no societal system which ensures that all persons have adequate health care and illness is prevented for all. That universe only exists in Liberal Utopia, and we simply can't afford to try and fund Liberal Utopia.
Click to expand...

People can and do make their own medical decisions in most free countries except in the US where ones financial situation dictates the decision. As for all people having adequate health care there are dozens of countries which offer adequate health care regardless of ones financial status.

In any case Obama is rectifying the problem. Four years from now it will all be moot.
 
apple0154 said:
Considering you just bought/checked out cars I thought you might be able to relate to a car analogy. For some reason I always think you're much brighter than you really are. Sorry. :(
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are talking about. I haven't bought or looked for a car in years. After the HELL RIDE Obama has taken the 'car in the ditch' for, I wouldn't mention cars or car analogies until after November... just my campaign advice, ignore it if you like!

People can and do make their own medical decisions in most free countries except in the US where ones financial situation dictates the decision. As for all people having adequate health care there are dozens of countries which offer adequate health care regardless of ones financial status.

In any case Obama is rectifying the problem. Four years from now it will all be moot.
Click to expand...

The wonderful thing about living in a free country like ours, you are completely free to go live in any one of the countries you like better! If you believe their health care is superior to ours, you are completely free to go live there and have your medical treatment. If you think some system other than the one we have is better, you can leave and go there, no one is going to stop you. Isn't American great?

Oh... and whenever Obama ACTUALLY rectifies a problem, please let me know, I'd like to witness that! So far, all he seems to know how to do is blame other people and other things for his feckless leadership. I can't think of a single problem he has rectified, in fact, I can't think of a single problem that he hasn't exacerbated and made considerably worse. God help us if he gets 4 more unfettered years to implement his socialist plans.
 
\\(())// said:
You want to give multimillionaire Mittzie four years so he can keep trying tax cuts for the rich?
Click to expand...

It's actually a better idea than re-electing a man who only knows how to blame problems on others. We've tried electing a slick-talking Democrat who had all the answers and said all the right stuff... it cost us $5 trillion, and still didn't fix any problems. Now here you are, suggesting we do that again. I just don't believe America is that stupid.

Remember when Spermin' Herman Cain was your idea of "only one man on the face of the earth who can legitimately prevent Barack Obama from having another 4 years"?
Click to expand...

Nope, I don't remember ever making such a statement about Cain, can you please provide a link to this? You can't? Okay, that's what I figured, because it didn't even make rational sense that I would say something like that, since Cain was one of 9 people on the face of the earth who could unseat Obama, at the time he was running. As it now stands, Romney is the only man who can do that, which is what I said.
 
Jarod said:
Dixie do you understand what a socialist is?
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Socialism /ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm/ is an economic system characterised by social ownership and control of the means of production and cooperative management of the economy,[1] and a political philosophy advocating such a system. "Social ownership" may refer to any one of, or a combination of, the following: cooperative enterprises, common ownership, direct public ownership or autonomous state enterprises.[2] There are many variations of socialism and as such there is no single definition encapsulating all of socialism.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets versus planning, how management is to be organised within economic enterprises, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4]

So there is your definition of Socialism, but I've gone even further in describing Obama as a particular kind of socialist;

Marxism

In the most influential of all socialist theories, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels believed the consciousness of those who earn a wage or salary (the "working class" in the broadest Marxist sense) would be moulded by their "conditions" of "wage-slavery", leading to a tendency to seek their freedom or "emancipation" by overthrowing ownership of the means of production by capitalists. For Marx and Engels, conditions determine consciousness and ending the role of the capitalist class leads eventually to a classless society in which the state would wither away.
Marx wrote: "It is not the consciousness of [people] that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness."[47] The Marxist conception of socialism is that of a specific historical phase that will displace capitalism and precede communism.

Now I will go one step further and say, YOU are a Marxist Socialist too! This is the system and government ideology you embrace, endorse, and fight for on a daily basis. Virtually EVERY liberal issue and EVERY liberal solution, is steeped in Marxist Socialism. From your class warfare rhetoric, constantly dividing Americans by class, and blatantly attacking capitalist success, to the actual policies of state-run, state-controlled everything! Nothing comes out of your fucked up mouth that isn't Marxist Socialist..... unless it's outright COMMUNIST!
 
Dixie said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Socialism /ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm/ is an economic system characterised by social ownership and control of the means of production and cooperative management of the economy,[1] and a political philosophy advocating such a system. "Social ownership" may refer to any one of, or a combination of, the following: cooperative enterprises, common ownership, direct public ownership or autonomous state enterprises.[2] There are many variations of socialism and as such there is no single definition encapsulating all of socialism.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets versus planning, how management is to be organised within economic enterprises, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4]

So there is your definition of Socialism, but I've gone even further in describing Obama as a particular kind of socialist;

Marxism

In the most influential of all socialist theories, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels believed the consciousness of those who earn a wage or salary (the "working class" in the broadest Marxist sense) would be moulded by their "conditions" of "wage-slavery", leading to a tendency to seek their freedom or "emancipation" by overthrowing ownership of the means of production by capitalists. For Marx and Engels, conditions determine consciousness and ending the role of the capitalist class leads eventually to a classless society in which the state would wither away.
Marx wrote: "It is not the consciousness of [people] that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness."[47] The Marxist conception of socialism is that of a specific historical phase that will displace capitalism and precede communism.

Now I will go one step further and say, YOU are a Marxist Socialist too! This is the system and government ideology you embrace, endorse, and fight for on a daily basis. Virtually EVERY liberal issue and EVERY liberal solution, is steeped in Marxist Socialism. From your class warfare rhetoric, constantly dividing Americans by class, and blatantly attacking capitalist success, to the actual policies of state-run, state-controlled everything! Nothing comes out of your fucked up mouth that isn't Marxist Socialist..... unless it's outright COMMUNIST!
Click to expand...

So give me an example of a Policy of the Obama administration that is Marxist Socialist.... and describe why you belive it fits your defination, I am entrigued.
 
Jarod said:
So give me an example of a Policy of the Obama administration that is Marxist Socialist.... and describe why you belive it fits your defination, I am entrigued.
Click to expand...

Tell ya what... you give me an Obama policy and explain why it ain't Marxist socialism, by the very definitions presented?

Government takeover of GM
Government takeover of Healthcare
Government control of industry through entities like EPA and IRS.
Wealth redistribution from the 1% to the 99%
Class warfare, the primary tool for implementing socialism.

Okay, so I totally get what you are doing... It's much easier to transition a nation to socialism or communism if they have no idea that's what is happening to them. So you call this shit everything under the sun except what it actually is, because you have to keep that secret until fully implemented, otherwise the people might revolt. Once all the elements are in place, and the tentacles of communism have been established all through our system, it will be too late for the people to stop it. That is your only hope, and you know it, so you RUN AWAY from the socialist Marxist label, but it's clear to any thinking person, that's exactly what you are and the system you hope to establish.
 
Dixie said:
Originally Posted by chicklet (Actually, the screen name is Taichiliberal, but intellectually bankrupt folks like Dixie revert to schoolyard taunts when they have no logical/factual recourse)
Explain to us all just how the Obama administration has done all these alleged horrors to the country when willfully ignorant and intellectually dishonest blowhards like Dixie:


1) Can purhase a firearm so long as he has no criminal record, is a resident of his state and adhere's to State laws.
[Liberals and Obama would strike this down in a heartbeat, if they could.]

The Dixie Dunce rides again! Here are the FACTS, as opposed to the NRA propaganda that Dixie's has so willingly swallowed without question. http://www.factcheck.org/2008/09/nra-targets-obama/

2) Can purchase any type of health insurance plan he wants.
[For the time being you can, if you can afford it.]Obviously, Dixie is not aware that thanks to the Health Care Reform, you will have MORE options regarding health care insurance plan. So the "free enterprise" system, where competition fosters better service and care for better prices will be at play....and if that doesn't work the federal gov't offers an affordable alternative. Gee, I thought neocon/teabagger bullhorns like Dixie were all about free market competition? But then again, current insurance prices are no picnic...and they sure as hell were screwing over the customers....just as Wendell Potter or Dr. Peelo.

3) Can walk into any supermarket in America with reasonable assurance that the FDA approves the quality of the produce, meats, etc.
[And pay twice as much for the products for something most morons can determine on their own.]

WTF is Dixie babbling about? I talking about food quality (clean, disease free), and instead of just conceding that point he tries to change the subject by bitching about product cost and making some assinine insinuation that the federal gov't is manipulating prices instead of the consumer! Newsflash, my Dixie Dunce.....THE BRAND NAMES AND PRODUCERS OF THE PRODUCTS DETERMINE THE PRICES, AND ARE SUBJECT TO CONSUMER CHOICE/ADVOCACY. In other words, if enough people don't buy your product in favor of a cheaper one of equal quality (or just stop purchasing your product altogether), prices will change! In other words, you don't like prices, get off your duff and complain to your grocer or get active in consumer price regulation groups. Free enterprise, bunky....it's a two way street.


4) Can decide where and how to save and/or invest his money.
[As long as you are okay with giving the government half your earnings.]
Ahhh, but ONLY if you're NOT a 1% that benefits from the Bush tax cuts! So our Dixie Dunce has a choice....support tax reforms that attempt a better sharing of the tax burden, or continue to support the failed Bush tax cuts that are screwing him! Ahhh, a conundrum for our loyal neocon/teabagger parrot Dixie!
5) Can turn on his tap water with reasonable assurance that it won't kill him.
[Reasonable but not absolute assurance, because while the fed can set standards, they can't ensure they will always be met. --best to boil your tap water before consuming.]
And yet there's no nation wide cases of cholera or disintary. (spl) Someone needs to educate the Dixie Dunce as to how water quality control varies from STATE to STATE in COMPLIANCE with Fed regulatory law. If the Dixie Dunce is so concerned about his local water quality, then he'd best go bitch to his local rep in his State's gov't.

6) Has the right to petition his gov't.
[For now... again, liberals would end this if they could.]

The Dixie Dunce rides again! Dixie just can't stand acknowledging a FACT that rips apart his Anti-Obama rhetoric, so he just relies on a neocon/teabagger wet dream of supposition and conjecture to substitute for FACT.

7) Has a RIGHT to a fair trial, and is innocent until proven guilty by a court of his peers.
[Unless you happen to accidentally shoot a minority.]
Newsflash for the Dixie Dunce: THAT IS WHAT AN ARREST AND TRIAL IS FOR, TO DETERMINE IF A FATAL SHOOTING WAS INDEED "ACCIDENTAL" OR A CASE OF MANSLAUGHTER OR SELF DEFENSE. And since Zimmerman ACTIVELY PURSUED a man he already profiled as a dangerous criminal AFTER HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE POLICE WERE ON THEIR WAY AND HE DID NOT HAVE TO PURSUE MARTIN, there is reasonable doubt to his claim of "accident" or "self defense". Would Dixie be so adamant in his knee -jerk assertion if Martin killed Zimmerman and claimed "accident" or "self defense" or envoked the Stand Your Ground Law? Hmmmmm?

8) Has a social service net that can assist him in times of unemployment or retirement.
[Which will cost my kids and grandkids $100 trillion.]
And yet another wild assertion that the Dixie Dunce swallowed from right wing mantras posted by Koch Brothers think tanks, Limbaugh and Drudge. To date, the GAO and the CBO DO NOT AGREE with the absurd assertion Dixie puts for here....especially since Social Security is received only by those who draw a paycheck.
To date, folk like Dixie cannot logically or factually explain just how Obama has taken any or the forementioned away.
Click to expand...


So pinhead's argument is, since Obama hasn't turned us into a complete Communist dictatorship, he must be okay, and I must be full of it.
Click to expand...

Funny how our Dixie Dunce keeps trying to sell his supposition and conjecture laden "predictions" as if they're fact, when he can't even logically and factually support the assertions he put forth above. But I expect nothing less from our Dixie Dunce, who STILL can't bring himself to deal with the FACTS that folk JUST LIKE HIM are responsible for screwing him over...30 years of reaganomics can attest to that, especially during the Shrub years.

Ride, my Dixie Dunce, ride!
 
Last edited:
chicklet: The Dixie Dunce rides again! Here are the FACTS...

The FACTS are as I stated, Obama and Liberals would completely ban guns if they could. To prance around claiming the Democrats are champions of the 2nd Amendment, is almost laughable, if it weren't so absolutely pathetic and such a blatant lie.

chciklet: Obviously, Dixie is not aware that thanks to the Health Care Reform, you will have MORE options regarding health care insurance plan.

Well, this is simply not true. Ideally, liberals want us to have only one choice and one option...single payer. At present, people are losing their insurance left and right, because they are losing the jobs associated with their insurance, and they can't afford the COBRA option anymore, it has become ridiculous. Those who are fortunate enough to still have a job with health insurance, are watching their premiums increase an average of 150% or more, and they literally have no other option than to pay the higher premiums, and in most cases, for a reduced level of coverage and higher deductibles. I know of not one single American who has seen a DECREASE in health care insurance or cost. NADDA!

chicklet: WTF is Dixie babbling about? I talking about food quality (clean, disease free), and instead of just conceding that point he tries to change the subject by bitching about product cost and making some assinine insinuation that the federal gov't is manipulating prices instead of the consumer! Newsflash, my Dixie Dunce.....THE BRAND NAMES AND PRODUCERS OF THE PRODUCTS DETERMINE THE PRICES, AND ARE SUBJECT TO CONSUMER CHOICE/ADVOCACY. In other words, if enough people don't buy your product in favor of a cheaper one of equal quality (or just stop purchasing your product altogether), prices will change! In other words, you don't like prices, get off your duff and complain to your grocer or get active in consumer price regulation groups. Free enterprise, bunky....it's a two way street.

It's nice to see you are trying to understand how capitalism works and how price is determined, but let me help you out here... The costs of complying with governmental mandates and regulations, has to be paid for by the company, who have to recover this cost when they determine the price a consumer will pay. Everything you purchase includes the cost of these mandates. Now, let's have an example to illustrate how it works: You are a company producing widgets... it costs you (normally) $1 to make a widget, pay your employees, benefits, insurance, etc. and have a reasonable profit for your shareholders. Now comes the government with a new mandate that widgets must meet in order to be produced.... whatever that costs the company, is simply divided by the number of widgets expected to sell. So now, the same $1 widget cost $2 because of the burden of the mandates. And maybe $2 is more than the market wants to pay for a widget? If so, the company eventually goes out of business because it has no market for $2 widgets.

The same is true with meat or food. We pay a certain price, but that price includes paying for all the regulations and mandates. Now, I am not saying we don't need any government oversight on food quality, but the point is, the more we allow government to heap on mandates and guidelines, the more we cause the price to increase. If we are paying this cost with the expectations that all our food will always be safe, we are foolish, because the government can simply never make such a guarantee. They can institute guidelines and regulations, and they can fine people for not following them, but they can't ensure that everyone will always follow the guidelines and that all food is always safe.

chicklet: Ahhh, but ONLY if you're NOT a 1% that benefits from the Bush tax cuts!

According to Obama, the Bush tax cuts needed to be extended "to avoid millions of middle class Americans from seeing a tax increase." Are you telling me he was LYING? I'm so sorry that you are so ignorant you believe the Bush tax cuts only benefited the top 1%, but it's a documented fact that the Bush tax cuts lowered the taxes for EVERY tax payer.

chicklet: And yet there's no nation wide cases of cholera or disintary. (spl) Someone needs to educate the Dixie Dunce as to how water quality control varies from STATE to STATE in COMPLIANCE with Fed regulatory law. If the Dixie Dunce is so concerned about his local water quality, then he'd best go bitch to his local rep in his State's gov't.

LMAO... so now.... one of the big things you think we should give credit and praise to Obama for, you are now telling me is none of his business and I should go bitch to my State? I hate to point this out, but isn't this typical these days? Blame someone else when you can't get the job done using your own idiotic plan? Amazing!!

chicklet: The Dixie Dunce rides again! Dixie just can't stand acknowledging a FACT that rips apart his Anti-Obama rhetoric, so he just relies on a neocon/teabagger wet dream of supposition and conjecture to substitute for FACT.

Might help if you actually posted a fact.

chicklet: Newsflash for the Dixie Dunce: THAT IS WHAT AN ARREST AND TRIAL IS FOR, TO DETERMINE IF A FATAL SHOOTING WAS INDEED "ACCIDENTAL" OR A CASE OF MANSLAUGHTER OR SELF DEFENSE. And since Zimmerman ACTIVELY PURSUED a man he already profiled as a dangerous criminal AFTER HE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE POLICE WERE ON THEIR WAY AND HE DID NOT HAVE TO PURSUE MARTIN, there is reasonable doubt to his claim of "accident" or "self defense". Would Dixie be so adamant in his knee -jerk assertion if Martin killed Zimmerman and claimed "accident" or "self defense" or envoked the Stand Your Ground Law? Hmmmmm?

Don't you mean: since Zimmerman ALLEGEDLY perused a man that he had ALLEGEDLY profiled? And how do you know he continued to pursue Martin, were you there? How do you know Martin didn't attack him? YOU made the comment that people are entitled to a RIGHT to a fair trial by a jury of their peers, but is that what you have done for Zimmerman? Or have you already convicted the man in the court of public opinion?

chicklet: And yet another wild assertion that the Dixie Dunce swallowed from right wing mantras posted by Koch Brothers think tanks, Limbaugh and Drudge. To date, the GAO and the CBO DO NOT AGREE with the absurd assertion Dixie puts for here....especially since Social Security is received only by those who draw a paycheck.

The aggregate total cost in dollar amount of all entitlement programs currently established by our government, is over $100 trillion. This is supported by anyone or any entity who has ever added up the total cost of all the government programs available. I don't know the Koch Brothers, or if they have said this, but it is a true statement, regardless.

Facts addressed... chicklet PWNED.... AGAIN!
 
Dixie said:
Tell ya what... you give me an Obama policy and explain why it ain't Marxist socialism, by the very definitions presented?

Government takeover of GM
Government takeover of Healthcare
Government control of industry through entities like EPA and IRS.
Wealth redistribution from the 1% to the 99%
Class warfare, the primary tool for implementing socialism.
Click to expand...

The government didn't take over GM. GM was failing and the government helped out with a loan.

The government didn't take over health care. Health care was failing and the government adjusted the rules of the game.

The EPA and the IRS do not take over industries. They apply laws to industries just like laws are applied to people. If you saw your neighbor doing oil changes as a part time job and dumping the oil on the property line between your place and his wouldn't you want someone to stop him? How would you like it if your trees and hedges started dying and the other neighbors told you to mind your own business and let the guy earn money? Or an industry fracking for gas and having gas coming out of your kitchen tap?

As for class warfare and the redistribution of money it's already happening. Why do the wealthy pay less income tax on capital gains? Why does it make any difference from where a person gets money? Income is money coming in. All money should be taxed the same. Class warfare is a war against the poor and always has been.

Okay, so I totally get what you are doing... It's much easier to transition a nation to socialism or communism if they have no idea that's what is happening to them. So you call this shit everything under the sun except what it actually is, because you have to keep that secret until fully implemented, otherwise the people might revolt. Once all the elements are in place, and the tentacles of communism have been established all through our system, it will be too late for the people to stop it. That is your only hope, and you know it, so you RUN AWAY from the socialist Marxist label, but it's clear to any thinking person, that's exactly what you are and the system you hope to establish.
Click to expand...

Dixie, Dixie, Dixie. What are we going to do with you? The definition of Socialism you posted read, ".... there is no single definition encapsulating all of socialism. They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets versus planning, how management is to be organised within economic enterprises, and the role of the state in constructing socialism." It would appear any government program would satisfy classifying a government Socialist. As soon as a government offered public transportation they could be considered Socialist.

On the other hand any government that did not control every means of production should be classified as a capitalist government. The USSR and China allow people to run small businesses. Can we classify them both as capitalist countries?

What socialist-screaming folks such as yourself fail to acknowledge is governments step in when Capitalism fails. Like, say, medical care run by capitalists when 45,000 people die each year from a lack thereof. Capitalism, free enterprise has been in force since 1776. While it worked very well for certain things 200 years later it's been discovered it is lacking in certain areas. Is it wise to just let shortcomings continue or let governments try to fix them? We know, beyond any doubt, that government supervised medical is preferable to capitalistic medical care. It has been proven in dozens of situations. In fact, there is not one exception. So the question is, "Why are you against progress?"
 
apple0154 said:
The government didn't take over GM. GM was failing and the government helped out with a loan.
Click to expand...

No, the government took control of 60% of GM stock, fired the CEO and replaced him with who they wanted to run the company. Sounds an awful lot like they took over the company, to me.

The government didn't take over health care. Health care was failing and the government adjusted the rules of the game.
Click to expand...

Again, government passed legislation several years ago, which puts nearly every aspect of American's health care in the hands of government. If you want to play semantics games, that's fine... Marxist Socialists are NEVER honest about their socialist policies.

The EPA and the IRS do not take over industries. They apply laws to industries just like laws are applied to people. If you saw your neighbor doing oil changes as a part time job and dumping the oil on the property line between your place and his wouldn't you want someone to stop him? How would you like it if your trees and hedges started dying and the other neighbors told you to mind your own business and let the guy earn money? Or an industry fracking for gas and having gas coming out of your kitchen tap?
Click to expand...

I never said the EPA and IRS take over industries. I stated that they CONTROL them with various regulations and mandates. Switching the conversation to discuss matters of local public health, which can be (an usually are) dealt with by local officials, is not helping you to refute any point I have made.

As for class warfare and the redistribution of money it's already happening. Why do the wealthy pay less income tax on capital gains? Why does it make any difference from where a person gets money? Income is money coming in. All money should be taxed the same. Class warfare is a war against the poor and always has been.
Click to expand...

Okay, so you are trying now to prove that socialists are not instigating class warfare socialist strategy by parroting more class warfare rhetoric? That's a strange take, I must say!

The "wealthy" don't pay less income tax on capital gains. They pay the exact same rate as you and I pay on capital gains. All money should be taxed the same? What about money received by welfare recipients? What about the incomes of 48% of America who are currently not paying ANY income tax? Class warfare is a tool used by Marxists to implement socialist policy. Plain and simple!

Dixie, Dixie, Dixie. What are we going to do with you? The definition of Socialism you posted read, ".... there is no single definition encapsulating all of socialism. They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets versus planning, how management is to be organised within economic enterprises, and the role of the state in constructing socialism." It would appear any government program would satisfy classifying a government Socialist. As soon as a government offered public transportation they could be considered Socialist.
Click to expand...

Yes, Democrat Marxist Socialists have been hard at work for many decades in this country, implementing Marxist Socialist policies, so it is no surprise a lot of our current system follows the Marxist Socialist model. This is not a reason to continue on the path to Communism. Sorry!

On the other hand any government that did not control every means of production should be classified as a capitalist government. The USSR and China allow people to run small businesses. Can we classify them both as capitalist countries?
Click to expand...

No, because they do not have a Constitution or Constitutional rights protected by said Constitution, and no authority to enforce breaches to those non-existent rights. Therefore, any 'appearances' of free-market capitalism are mere illusions for show, so that nit wits like yourself, can run around the message boards pointing to them as 'examples' when they really aren't. China and Russia (there is no USSR anymore) are Communist countries, the government has full control over the people and businesses, and they ultimately call all the shots.

What socialist-screaming folks such as yourself fail to acknowledge is governments step in when Capitalism fails. Like, say, medical care run by capitalists when 45,000 people die each year from a lack thereof. Capitalism, free enterprise has been in force since 1776. While it worked very well for certain things 200 years later it's been discovered it is lacking in certain areas. Is it wise to just let shortcomings continue or let governments try to fix them? We know, beyond any doubt, that government supervised medical is preferable to capitalistic medical care. It has been proven in dozens of situations. In fact, there is not one exception. So the question is, "Why are you against progress?"
Click to expand...

Capitalism doesn't fail, it has NEVER failed, any time it has ever been tried or attempted. It ALWAYS succeeds! The US, up until Obamacare, had the BEST health care system in the entire world. No other health care system has come anywhere close in terms of research, technical advancement, ground-breaking procedures, finding cures, developing vaccines, or treating the indigent. NOTHING the government can ever do, will eliminate all pain and suffering for all people.... just doesn't happen in OUR universe... only in Liberal Utopia, and we can't afford that.
 
 
apple0154 said:
Poor Dix. One can't help but sympathize with the mentally challenged chap. He doesn't understand Socialism and he doesn't remember what he has written and he....well, let's just say he's "special".
Click to expand...

Poor apple, too fucking clueless to even comprehend what point \\||/// FAILED at making with his links. You see, in another thread, I said that Mitt Romney was the only man on the face of the planet who could legitimately prevent Obama from serving another 4 years. So now, bird-brains has dug up a bunch of threads where I supported and endorsed Herman Cain in the primaries. As if, that somehow proves that I have contradicted myself. At the time I supported Cain, there were 9 people who could have possibly ran against Obama, that is not the case today. So it doesn't matter who I endorsed months ago, or who could have possibly won the nomination back then, my statement is still true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top