or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Congratulations, You're Going to Elect a Socialist
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Congratulations, You're Going to Elect a Socialist

post #1 of 208
Thread Starter 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Listen to the clips. He clearly and strongly favors redistribution of wealth. He says that it's a tragedy the Constitution wasn't interpreted in such a way (during the Civil Rights movement) to allow major "redistributive change."

Let's consider the implications. Obviously he wants to rob the rich and give to the poor. Obviously he thinks the government must "do more" for the average person. But we knew that already. It's when we examine the comments, made in the context of the history of the Civil Rights movement, one must wonder: Does he favor slave reparations? Would he redistribute wealth on race rather than class lines? Both? Is it not reasonable to assume he will stack the court as President to ensure that the Constitution CAN be interpreted to allow for income redistribution?

It's as I said: The man does not like America as its structured. Change does not mean a change of policy. It means changing the nation at its core. It means radical socialization of our economy and society as a whole. His beliefs are the most liberal of perhaps any Presidential candidate in history. He makes McGovern look like Ronald Reagan. He makes LBJ look like Barry Goldwater. I honestly cannot think of a more leftist candidate, not just in my lifetime, but ever.

Given this interview and past comments, I simply do not understand how any American who believes in the founding principles of this nation can vote for this man. Those that do are either ignorant, obsessed with hatred of George Bush, or favor the kind of radical socialization Obama represents.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #2 of 208
What are you worried about. You have no wealth so he's clearly not talking about you.

Obama has already said he is not in favor of slave reparations in past debates. In fact he said what we need are reparations for schools and other things to help the disadvantaged.


First of tell us what is so bad about Socialism? What's so radical about it?

Why do people think that the US is some bastion of Capitalism. It isn't. In in true
Capitalistic society those people that failed would not have Gov provided program (unemployment, Welfare, etc) to ease the fall.

The 840 Million bailout is not Capitalism that's Socialism.

How many bailouts have the US Citizens co-funded to bailout companies that should have been allowed to die?

You're confused out your gourd if you think the US is purely Capitalist.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #3 of 208
Congratulations, you are about to suffer a landslide defeat and apparently have no clue why.

FEAR!

I don't think you know what "socialism" means.

Obama ain't a socialist.

"Obama is about as far from being a socialist as Joe The Plumber is from being a rocket scientist," said Darrell West, director of governance studies at the Brookings Institution. "I think it's hard for McCain to call Obama a socialist when George Bush is nationalizing banks."


FIRE!

Quote:
It's when we examine the comments, made in the context of the history of the Civil Rights movement, one must wonder: Does he favor slave reparations? Would he redistribute wealth on racerather than class lines? Both? Is it not reasonable to assume he will stack the court as President to ensure that the Constitution CAN be interpreted to allow for income redistribution?

Add some race-baiting to the red-baiting.

Here's what I MUST WONDER: Do the social conservatives not realize why they are about to suffer a landslide defeat?

In 2000 Bush won by 5 electoral votes
In 2004 Bush won by 35 electoral votes

In 2008, Barack Obama will very likely win by at least twice as many votes as Bush won by in two contests.

Right-wing nuts: "BLACKS AND COMMIES! BLACKS AND COMMIES!"
American Public: " "
Right-wing nuts: "BLACKS AND COMMIES! BLACKS AND COMMIES!"
American Public: *votes for Obama*
Right-wing nuts: "But…. what about blacks and commies… ? "
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #4 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Listen to the clips. He clearly and strongly favors redistribution of wealth. He says that it's a tragedy the Constitution wasn't interpreted in such a way (during the Civil Rights movement) to allow major "redistributive change."

Let's consider the implications. Obviously he wants to rob the rich and give to the poor. Obviously he thinks the government must "do more" for the average person. But we knew that already. It's when we examine the comments, made in the context of the history of the Civil Rights movement, one must wonder: Does he favor slave reparations? Would he redistribute wealth on race rather than class lines? Both? Is it not reasonable to assume he will stack the court as President to ensure that the Constitution CAN be interpreted to allow for income redistribution?

It's as I said: The man does not like America as its structured. Change does not mean a change of policy. It means changing the nation at its core. It means radical socialization of our economy and society as a whole. His beliefs are the most liberal of perhaps any Presidential candidate in history. He makes McGovern look like Ronald Reagan. He makes LBJ look like Barry Goldwater. I honestly cannot think of a more leftist candidate, not just in my lifetime, but ever.

Given this interview and past comments, I simply do not understand how any American who believes in the founding principles of this nation can vote for this man. Those that do are either ignorant, obsessed with hatred of George Bush, or favor the kind of radical socialization Obama represents.

No one hates Bush. We just disapprove of his job performance.

What socialism has done for me at no cost to me:
I speak 3 languages relatively well.
I have received great art education.
I have an IT degree.
I have broad knowledge of science.
I know some Latin and some Greek.
I was able to go the US with $ 400.- in my pocket and I am now in the 5 % who will pay for the Republican debt.
Further I was able to build 3 companies here that, as it turns out are not affected by the current economic situation. (Solar and Wind and software)
I employ people.
My parents were able to retire comfortably with great healthcare and a pension that allowed them to even put some $ aside and travel.
I have an understanding of European history.
I have a basic understanding of psychology.
I own real estate in the US and in Austria.
I work and play with some of the greatest Jazz musicians of our time.
My graphic design work sells to the tune of Millions.

Ask Arnold Schwarzenegger how he feels about the "socialist" education he received from the Austrian government.


Simply horrible isn't it.
post #5 of 208
No. Read the transcript.

Specifically, he said that the tragedy was not in the fact that the courts interpreted conservatively but in the fact that the CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT focused on JUDICIAL changes (legislation from the bench, which Obama DECRIES as do conservatives, at least until this tape came out) as opposed to LEGISLATIVE and GROUND changes that would have moved economic and political power back to dispossessed communities -- that you would find this offensive implies that you think it is alright that we have a permanent racial underclass and it is not talking about redistribution of wealth.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #6 of 208
This line of attack is going to fail so hard it's funny. It is hacked up edits and not digestible.

Poor Republicans.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #7 of 208
...they STILL have better schools, they STILL have better health care, they STILL have a freer press, they STILL have lower infant mortality rate, they STILL have fewer people living in poverty, they STILL have higher literacy, they STILL have A HIGHER STANDARD OF LIFE (ie, "more, better stuff") than American citizens.

That's 'socialist' Denmark.

Barack Obama wants tax breaks for people who earn less than $250,000. Anywhere in the world outside America, he'd be running as a conservative.
post #8 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

learn to speak Mandarin,

I already ordered the Rosetta Stone.
Not because I think that Mc "need a" Cane is going to win, but I am installing solar panels in China.

We'll have to clean up the place if we want to live. Might as well make some money while we're at it.
post #9 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamac View Post

I already ordered the Rosetta Stone.
Not because I think that Mc "need a" Cane is going to win, but I am installing solar panels in China.

We'll have to clean up the place if we want to live. Might as well make some money while we're at it.

Can you install some at my house?
post #10 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

Can you install some at my house?

What's your avg yearly KWh use? (add up e bills/12)
post #11 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

What are you worried about. You have no wealth so he's clearly not talking about you.

Bingo.
post #12 of 208
You know what's cute? The same right wing noise machine that decided that Obama is some kind of mind control hypnotist relies on the utter, child-like credulity of its audience to carry forth its message.

"Obama is a socialist" (which, in the parlance of the witless, is just "liberal" turned up to 11), says the megaphone, and just like that, millions of people who could no more tell you what a "socialist" actually is than fly, begin to intone the terrible news as one.

The fact that Obama's tax policies are entirely unremarkable and only "liberal" compared to the discredited trickle-down policies of the discredited smoking ruin of "Republicanism" is no problem at all. The megaphone could say "Obama is a squid", and some folks here would be breathlessly posting the news of ink traces discerned on Michelle's neck by some intrepid blogger.

Apparently "socialist" isn't quite getting the job done, since I've noticed that in news reports from McCain/Palin rallies the fans have taken to calling Obama a "communist", which is "liberal" turned up to eleventy million.

I wonder where they go from here? If "liberal" isn't a swear word anymore, "socialist" and "communist" aren't the reliable scare terms of yore, and "terrorist" is a tough sell even for the mildly retarded, how do you convey to the American people the depths of your antipathy?

I vote for "Liberals are filthy, shit eating fuck monkeys", which at least has the advantage of honestly conveying one's sentiments without the encumbrance of decorative political terms.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #13 of 208
Thread Starter 
I love you guys.

1) He didn't really say that!
2) He said he doesn't favor reparations!
3) Out of context!
4) SDW, you're an idiot!
5) Socialism really isn't all that bad!
6) We have socialism already, so what's the big deal!
7) SDW, you're an idiot!


Truly predictable. Why don't you just admit that it doesn't matter what Obama says anymore. You're going to vote for him anyway.

And to those making the "out of context/it's been edited" defense: The point is that the more context one considers, the worse it gets for Obama. Yes, he was talking about the Civil Rights movement, but in so doing he clearly was supporting "redistributive change." He was lambasting the Constitution for its "cultural blind spots" that we still are suffering with today. In other words, we've made no progress on race in this country since the document was created.

I'm not sure who's more terrifying, Obama or those that support him.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #14 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Listen to the clips. He clearly and strongly favors redistribution of wealth. He says that it's a tragedy the Constitution wasn't interpreted in such a way (during the Civil Rights movement) to allow major "redistributive change."

Let's consider the implications. Obviously he wants to rob the rich and give to the poor. Obviously he thinks the government must "do more" for the average person. But we knew that already. It's when we examine the comments, made in the context of the history of the Civil Rights movement, one must wonder: Does he favor slave reparations? Would he redistribute wealth on race rather than class lines? Both? Is it not reasonable to assume he will stack the court as President to ensure that the Constitution CAN be interpreted to allow for income redistribution?

It's as I said: The man does not like America as its structured. Change™ does not mean a change of policy. It means changing the nation at its core. It means radical socialization of our economy and society as a whole. His beliefs are the most liberal of perhaps any Presidential candidate in history. He makes McGovern look like Ronald Reagan. He makes LBJ look like Barry Goldwater. I honestly cannot think of a more leftist candidate, not just in my lifetime, but ever..

As we know there should only be one kind of socialism.

The kind that gives handouts to rich people and corporations and their good friends.

The kind that Bush has practised.

Fascinating how the glowing eyes in the deep sockets of the Skull & Bones has mesmerised the middle classes of America to hand over their hard earned gelt to those who inherited their wealth.

It's like some massive Dutch Auction or Pyramid Selling Scheme where they think it'll be their turn next under the golden faucet.

Quote:
Given this interview and past comments, I simply do not understand how any American who believes in the founding principles of this nation can vote for this man. Those that do are either ignorant, obsessed with hatred of George Bush, or favor the kind of radical socialization Obama represents.

Which founding principles were they? The slavery, or the big land steal?
post #15 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

And to those making the "out of context/it's been edited" defense: The point is that the more context one considers, the worse it gets for Obama. Yes, he was talking about the Civil Rights movement, but in so doing he clearly was supporting "redistributive change." He was lambasting the Constitution for its "cultural blind spots" that we still are suffering with today. In other words, we've made no progress on race in this country since the document was created.

I'm not sure who's more terrifying, Obama or those that support him.

I am afraid you don't understand: The civil rights movement was about redistributive change. It was about giving political and eventually economic power to blacks. Period. You cannot logically claim otherwise. In fact, to claim otherwise is to ignore the role the civil rights movement played in our history.

The constitutions cultural blind spots are simply those that would have allowed Jim Crow to continue to exist. There is nothing in the constitution to support the Brown decision. NOTHING. That IS a problem with the constitution.

This whole false discussion enrages me because conservative blow hards aren't simply criticizing Obama's take on the civil rights movement (and his take is that of a constitutional conservative) but by doing so they are making suggestions that the entire civil rights period was a mistake -- you cannot have it both ways, either the power redistributive policies of the Civil rights era were ok and Obama is correct, or Obama is the devil and the civil rights judicial acts were wrong.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #16 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

He says that it's a tragedy the Constitution wasn't interpreted in such a way (during the Civil Rights movement) to allow major "redistributive change."

No, what he clearly says if one actually reads the entire transcript is the tragedy was the Civil rights movement focused TOO much on the Courts to promote change, harming their ability to get things done via the legislative and executive branches.

Which is........... wait for it....... a conservative principle.

Quote:
"If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples, so that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it Id be okay."

"But," Obama said, "The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, as least as it's been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasnt shifted."

Obama said "one of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil rights movement, was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still stuffer from that."

What in the world, pray tell, is so awful about the above quote?
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #17 of 208
Exactly...

I don't understand the lack of reading ability of the conservatives out there...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #18 of 208
I see Obama as a typical politician. He changes his message for the audience. When he's back in Chicago he says what plays well there and when he hits the national stage he'll Change his message so as to appeal to a different audience. I'm not saying that McCain doesn't do similar things but what I am saying is that Obama is no breath of fresh air when it comes to politics.

Add in the fact that Obama has done bubkiss in the US Senate and the media spent more time and money investigating Palin than they did Obama ... we can only guess what his true feeling are on issues. Unless we wanted to do something silly like trust a politician to tell us their true feelings.


We'll have the next four years to Discover Obama. It will be a fun new adventure ride installed in Washington DC on January 20th.

SDW may not be a rich man but I'm guessing the company that employs him will be looking to reduce costs after Obama/Pelosi/Reid.
post #19 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

I see Obama as a typical politician. He changes his message for the audience. When he's back in Chicago he says what plays well there and when he hits the national stage he'll Change his message so as to appeal to a different audience. I'm not saying that McCain doesn't do similar things but what I am saying is that Obama is no breath of fresh air when it comes to politics.

Add in the fact that Obama has done bubkiss in the US Senate and the media spent more time and money investigating Palin than they did Obama ... we can only guess what his true feeling are on issues. Unless we wanted to do something silly like trust a politician to tell us their true feelings.


We'll have the next four years to Discover Obama. It will be a fun new adventure ride installed in Washington DC on January 20th.

SDW may not be a rich man but I'm guessing the company that employs him will be looking to reduce costs after Obama/Pelosi/Reid.

I have yet to see Obama change his stances in any significant fashion... McCain on the other hand...

Obama has some seriously non-standard non-left views on things. He clearly doesn't support the idea of judicial legislation. His support for ethanol is NOT politically opportune. etc...

And SDW is a music teacher.
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #20 of 208
Quote:
I can't read it, there's no words on it! Fuck it, We'll do it live!

This is typical of the ignorant masses. Especially the masses who only get one view of information. It has remained the same for centuries. It's unfortunate that the Internet has not been used as a tool to alleviate this. Time will tell.

Welcome to the 21st century SDW, et al. Enjoy what will be a bumpy ride. But one that will shape the country to this new century.

Quote:
Fucking thing sucks!
post #21 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

We'll have the next four years to Discover Obama. It will be a fun new adventure ride installed in Washington DC on January 20th.

Yeah and look what happened last time you let a minority group into the White House!

Some people just take this "Land of Opportunity" crap just a little too literally. The Founding Fathers clearly showed that it was never meant for everyone

Quote:
SDW may not be a rich man but I'm guessing the company that employs him will be looking to reduce costs after Bush/Cheney .

Give credit where it's due.
post #22 of 208
Guess what? McCain voted pro-socialist by leaping without looking at the bailout. Screw him. Four years without Republicans? We could use the break.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #23 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I love you guys.

1) He didn't really say that!
2) He said he doesn't favor reparations!
3) Out of context!
4) SDW, you're an idiot!
5) Socialism really isn't all that bad!
6) We have socialism already, so what's the big deal!
7) SDW, you're an idiot!

I love you too.

But why are you laughing? Apart from points four and seven (your being an 'idiot', which you are not), all of these things appear to be true. Sticking up a LOL isn't addressing any of these responses.

The tape is a load of shit. He's not saying what you really, really want him to be saying. He just isn't.

And if you think socialism's bad, come and have a coffee in Denmark. It's not really socialist, but compared to what Obama wants to do it's unalloyed Bolshevism. And everyone has a flat screen TV and an espresso machine.

(I just don't get American socialism fear. I like America, and Americans, but this... I just don't get.)
post #24 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Guess what? McCain voted pro-socialist by leaping without looking at the bailout. Screw him. Four years without Republicans? We could use the break.

John McCain, Town Hall meeting in 2000...

Quote:
Audience member: "Why is it that someone like my father who goes to school for 13 years gets penalized in a huge tax bracket because he's a doctor."

McCain: "I think it's to some degree because we feel obviously that wealthy people can afford more."

Audience member: "Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism?"

McCain: "Here's what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there's nothing wrong with paying somewhat more."

I love how socialism is now a four lettered word in American politics.

I showed this to my brother and nephew (staunch McCain supporters)...stunned silence.
post #25 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

John McCain, Town Hall meeting in 2000...



I love how socialism is now a four lettered word in American politics.

I showed this to my brother and nephew (staunch McCain supporters)...stunned silence.

But it's weirder than that-- they're using "socialism" to mean something like "progressive income tax" plus "sort of acknowledging that poor folks could use a little help" plus "for the sake of this argument, poor folks equal colored people."

It's as if, faced with the likely election of a moderate, centrist Democrat-who-just-happens-to-be-black, the Republican Party has decided to listen to it's inner John Birch and campaign like its 1955.

Remember, the "respectable" opposition to the civil rights movement involved branding everyone involved, from Martin Luther King on down, as "communists." It wasn't antipathy to extending civil liberties to African Americans, oh no no no, it was that socialists and commies were using America's blacks and their liberal enablers to undermine the basic foundations of our society and usher in an age of radical federal control. See, because once Washington was allowed to tell a state that they couldn't have whites only drinking fountains or segregated schools it was only a matter of time till we all had to call one another comrade and our children would be taken from us to be indoctrinated in this foreign "black people are citizens too" ideology.

It's in the Republican DNA, and Nixon's Southern Strategy means they've kept the idea active and thriving. I really don't think they can help it: black people with power equal communism.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #26 of 208
This CNN article wants you to feel bad for these families earning $500K because Obama's tax plan may mean they can't pay for gymnastics classes for their kids.

$250,000 per year, relative to the average income of an average world citizen, is almost obscene in comparison. Roughly 1/6 of the world's population lives in a grinding poverty that even a poor American cannot really comprehend. Life is hard. The poor, put-upon $250,000 class is just gonna have to learn to suck it up and deal with driving a 3-year old Chevy Tahoe instead of the leather-appointed Escalade when shuttling little Trevor to and from soccer practice.
post #27 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Listen to the clips. He clearly and strongly favors redistribution of wealth. He says that it's a tragedy the Constitution wasn't interpreted in such a way (during the Civil Rights movement) to allow major "redistributive change."

Let's consider the implications. Obviously he wants to rob the rich and give to the poor. Obviously he thinks the government must "do more" for the average person. But we knew that already. It's when we examine the comments, made in the context of the history of the Civil Rights movement, one must wonder: Does he favor slave reparations? Would he redistribute wealth on race rather than class lines? Both? Is it not reasonable to assume he will stack the court as President to ensure that the Constitution CAN be interpreted to allow for income redistribution?

It's as I said: The man does not like America as its structured. Change does not mean a change of policy. It means changing the nation at its core. It means radical socialization of our economy and society as a whole. His beliefs are the most liberal of perhaps any Presidential candidate in history. He makes McGovern look like Ronald Reagan. He makes LBJ look like Barry Goldwater. I honestly cannot think of a more leftist candidate, not just in my lifetime, but ever.

Given this interview and past comments, I simply do not understand how any American who believes in the founding principles of this nation can vote for this man. Those that do are either ignorant, obsessed with hatred of George Bush, or favor the kind of radical socialization Obama represents.

I'm voting for Obama, but NOT for ANY of the totally false allegations listed above.

Vote and vote often.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #28 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

This CNN article wants you to feel bad for these families earning $500K because Obama's tax plan may mean they can't pay for gymnastics classes for their kids.

...

Should we shut down the gyms now and put the gym teachers on expanded unemployment?
post #29 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

SDW may not be a rich man but I'm guessing the company that employs him will be looking to reduce costs after Obama/Pelosi/Reid.

It's a good thing they haven't under your beloved and amazingly successful Bush/Cheney administration right??



I think reciting Drudge talking points is way cool.
post #30 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I love you guys.

1) He didn't really say that!
2) He said he doesn't favor reparations!
3) Out of context!
4) SDW, you're an idiot!
5) Socialism really isn't all that bad!
6) We have socialism already, so what's the big deal!
7) SDW, you're an idiot!


Truly predictable. Why don't you just admit that it doesn't matter what Obama says anymore. You're going to vote for him anyway.

And to those making the "out of context/it's been edited" defense: The point is that the more context one considers, the worse it gets for Obama. Yes, he was talking about the Civil Rights movement, but in so doing he clearly was supporting "redistributive change." He was lambasting the Constitution for its "cultural blind spots" that we still are suffering with today. In other words, we've made no progress on race in this country since the document was created.

I'm not sure who's more terrifying, Obama or those that support him.

McCain and those that support him are clearly more terrifying, to infinity and beyond even.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #31 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

Should we shut down the gyms now and put the gym teachers on expanded unemployment?

Not to mention the equestrian instruction. What will the neighbors think when Muffy has to drop out of dressage class? Their lives, for the most part, revolve around these trivialities, possessions, things they can show off and/or brag about. Everything else is pretty much secondary.

Dude, the gym has nothing to do with this, they will reach the customers who do sacrifice those material garbage and trivial bullshit. Nice spin though.
post #32 of 208
Quote:
Were set up, unlike other states in the union, where its collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.

Guess who?
post #33 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

I see Obama as a typical politician. He changes his message for the audience. When he's back in Chicago he says what plays well there and when he hits the national stage he'll Change his message so as to appeal to a different audience. I'm not saying that McCain doesn't do similar things but what I am saying is that Obama is no breath of fresh air when it comes to politics.

Add in the fact that Obama has done bubkiss in the US Senate and the media spent more time and money investigating Palin than they did Obama ... we can only guess what his true feeling are on issues. Unless we wanted to do something silly like trust a politician to tell us their true feelings.


We'll have the next four years to Discover Obama. It will be a fun new adventure ride installed in Washington DC on January 20th.

SDW may not be a rich man but I'm guessing the company that employs him will be looking to reduce costs after Obama/Pelosi/Reid.

McCain changes his message more often than Bush screws up his word usage.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #34 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by FloorJack View Post

SDW may not be a rich man but I'm guessing the company that employs him will be looking to reduce costs after Obama/Pelosi/Reid.

Quote:
Reward Teachers: Obama and Biden will promote new and innovative ways to increase teacher pay that are developed with teachers, not imposed on them. Districts will be able to design programs that reward accomplished educators who serve as a mentor to new teachers with a salary increase. Districts can reward teachers who work in underserved places like rural areas and inner cities. And if teachers consistently excel in the classroom, that work can be valued and rewarded as well.

Guess who?
post #35 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by hardeeharhar View Post

Exactly...

I don't understand the lack of reading ability of the conservatives out there...

I believe the applicable term is "willful ignorance".
(them, not you )
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
eye
bee
BEE
Reply
post #36 of 208
I am not an Obama supporter, but I thank the Lord that this madness was averted in time.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #37 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

Listen to the clips. He clearly and strongly favors redistribution of wealth. He says that it's a tragedy the Constitution wasn't interpreted in such a way (during the Civil Rights movement) to allow major "redistributive change."

Let's consider the implications. Obviously he wants to rob the rich and give to the poor. Obviously he thinks the government must "do more" for the average person. But we knew that already. It's when we examine the comments, made in the context of the history of the Civil Rights movement, one must wonder: Does he favor slave reparations? Would he redistribute wealth on race rather than class lines? Both? Is it not reasonable to assume he will stack the court as President to ensure that the Constitution CAN be interpreted to allow for income redistribution?

It's as I said: The man does not like America as its structured. Change™ does not mean a change of policy. It means changing the nation at its core. It means radical socialization of our economy and society as a whole. His beliefs are the most liberal of perhaps any Presidential candidate in history. He makes McGovern look like Ronald Reagan. He makes LBJ look like Barry Goldwater. I honestly cannot think of a more leftist candidate, not just in my lifetime, but ever.

Given this interview and past comments, I simply do not understand how any American who believes in the founding principles of this nation can vote for this man. Those that do are either ignorant, obsessed with hatred of George Bush, or favor the kind of radical socialization Obama represents.

Even if what you say is true ( which it's not ) : Whatever it takes to get rid of the Neocons who have just about drove this country nose first into the ground!

Honestly SDW next you'll be saying he's the antichrist!

As far as The Bush experience goes I can't possibly think of a worse president in my lifetime. It's not hatred it's disgust! At his lack of vision, mismangement, and selfserving untruthfulness! I honestly can't think of someone who's cared less for the well being of the american people. The thought of McCain and Palin in the Whitehouse for 4 more years of even more fun and games just turns my stomach! So yes I will gladly vote for Obama! Hopefully he can pull us out of the mess good ol' Dubbya has made. It's sure a big one.

SDW as I've tried to tell you two years ago times are changing and are now just about to come full circle.

It's " Last call " for the Neocons. They can growl and snap all they want. I'm just sorry that it took so long for people to wake up!

It's about time to make this dark period in american history a bad memory.

Now maybe we can get back to some real government!


Thank you for your attention.

Ps. One more time! " Where's the WMD? "
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #38 of 208
Wait, wait, wait. The Bush administration with the help of his chrony friends in Congress and a plethora of Billionaire lobbyists are currently NATIONALIZING THE BANKS...and your biggest concern is whether or not the working poor and the middle-class get a few more tax breaks?

Wow!

I've learned one thing this election season: if Republicans make a charge against you then they're equally if not more guilty of the same.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #39 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

...they STILL have better schools, they STILL have better health care, they STILL have a freer press, they STILL have lower infant mortality rate, they STILL have fewer people living in poverty, they STILL have higher literacy, they STILL have A HIGHER STANDARD OF LIFE (ie, "more, better stuff") than American citizens.

That's 'socialist' Denmark.

Barack Obama wants tax breaks for people who earn less than $250,000. Anywhere in the world outside America, he'd be running as a conservative.

Now tax breaks are bad? WTF is up with these Republicans? They used to be the kings of staying on message. Taunt, taunt, taunt, taunt. What happened?
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #40 of 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

I love you too.

But why are you laughing? Apart from points four and seven (your being an 'idiot', which you are not), all of these things appear to be true. Sticking up a LOL isn't addressing any of these responses.

The tape is a load of shit. He's not saying what you really, really want him to be saying. He just isn't.

And if you think socialism's bad, come and have a coffee in Denmark. It's not really socialist, but compared to what Obama wants to do it's unalloyed Bolshevism. And everyone has a flat screen TV and an espresso machine.

(I just don't get American socialism fear. I like America, and Americans, but this... I just don't get.)

There are many of us Americans (mostly on the coasts) that really want a more European style culture in this country. We want clean air. We want clean water. We want renewable fuels. We want health care. We want multi-culturalism. We want Christians, Jews and Muslims to co-exist and share ideas and debate scripture. We want to be a thoughtful, reflective, learned society that understand the true costs of these things.

But what we have is..."FUCK YOU COMMIE! SOCIALIST DICKHEAD!"
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Congratulations, You're Going to Elect a Socialist