Slam Obama (merged)
 

:o

-S

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas...t-connections/

An excerpt:

Obama’s Communist Mentor
 

Since we are on the subject!

-S

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-communist-mentor/

McCain Follows Obama Down Socialist Road
 

McCain is not much better! :huh:

-S

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/mccain...ocialist-road/

And what? Why is it that as soon as someone displays any sort of left leanings, they are branded a socialist or communist and that is seen as bad. So I guess Europe must be bad, as it is essentially social democratic.

Subman you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

The headline is misleading for the intended purpose, it must be "That Guy's International COMMUNIST Connections". My name is Sky McBird, and I approved this message.

..........and the Subman propaganda campaign rolls on..........yawn.....:zzz: :dead:

Obama exhibits some Socialist ideals. However, this country was not based on Socialist ideals.

Subman is allowed to have his propoganda machine rolling. It does make for some fun and converstation!

That may well be what Europe is or is based on, but the United States of America is supposed to be based on the Rule of Law (fudimently different), that no man or entity of man is suppose to be above. That is why it is a Republic. Read the Feseralist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers, and Common Sense. That is what we're supposed to have, but men are corruptable.

So if a nation is based on the Rule of Law, Individual Liberty, and the Right to own Property, how can Socialism, or Communism coexist? Since they are the opposite of it. And while we're at it, Fascism isn't that much different as it applies the same principle government rule.

But what gets me is how Communism/Socialism is called the far left, and Fascism is called the far Right. To be more accurate as they are all totalitarian in nature, they should all be on one side of the scale, not opposites. The other side is Liberty. But the US of A is not so far as to say anarchy, as it is tempered by laws. These are set in the Constution and Bill of Rights.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...59166933078950

Whoa hold on now. Being a socialist is no longer a label you can apply exclusively to the left after Comrade Bush sent 700+ billion to Wallstreet. The right has to come up with a new smear after Comrade Bush's "bailout".

I never let the right get away with this issue. You all susidize people like cattle and dairy farmers and call the left communists when they want to sudsidize the healthcare to clean that same junk out of people's arteries.

This is meaningless when they can just go set aside or rewrite laws in a matter of 2 days. This has happened on a weekly basis under the Bush regime. Patriot Act, Wallstreet bailouts, wiretaps, etc.

I love this extremist polarizing black and white painting: "rule of law" versus "socialism." :lol:

"Only a Sith deals in absolutes." (Obi Wan) ;)

Oh, and some of us over here live in republics as well, FYI. Germans, for example.

You know, I was actually planning on answering to this post. But the more I read it, the more illogical and uneducated it becomes, to the point that I have no idea where to start anymore. I'd probably had to explain the differences between communism, socialism, capitalism, social capitalism, law in general, what constitutes a republic..basicly every term you threw in and mixed up here, first.

Seriously, go get a good book about different ideologies and what defines them. Your post more or less reads like a guy that watched too much Fox News without bothering to ever read up on the terms used there.

First of all, find me a smear the right has come up with concerning the bailout? I think you'll find Obama riding the horse of FEAR concerning in his speechs. Obama has been riding the horse of FEAR for many months. The people are buying it.


Subsidized cattle and dairy farmers? Well, we need to eat! Both right and left want to subsidize healthcare. Both have a different view on how to do it.

This is only because it has been allowed to happen. It is not the fundimental foundations. And if allowed to continue unabated, will result in a complete totalitarian regime.

Don't forget that Senor Boosh also said the Constitution is just a GD piece of paper. I really think he looks upon himself as the dictator of America. His push towards the NAU is to have more land to rule over. Call me crazy, but I really think the man to be power hungry.

The Patriot Act, give up more liberty for security. Franklin warned of this, though I wonder how many people know it.

Wallstreet bailouts. To give the government more control over the nations production as it now owns the industry, not the private citizen. This is totalitarian. Not wisdom.

Wiretaps, breaks the "thou shalt not" rules of the Bill of Rights. That the people shall be secure in their persons and their papers.

There is a long list of intrusions by government into the rights and daily lives of the private citizens that for the life of me, I can not understand how the American People, my countrymen can just let go on.

I myself prefer the animating contest of freedom over the tranquility of servitude. I do belive the framers are spinning like lathes in their graves at what this nation has become compared to what it was founded as.

So I do not disagree with you even though I may not share your views. And it is rediculous the way the "left" and the "right" point fingers at each other, as they are really on the same side of the spectrum with total control as the main focus. But the more we bicker back and forth, the more power they gain while we're not looking.

So to quote, I do not remember the author, "....the next time the redcoats won't be coming; they're already here".

Sorry, I don't watch Fox News. The info I do have comes from books. Papers, pamphlets, and a long list of historical documents. But to undrstand the US of A, one has to understand the foundations first. And what set it aside from the rest of the world.

I am pretty much aware of the US foundations. I'd also say I understand the american mindset, which, in principle, I even admire for it's independence and positive outlook to the future and the US' strong emphasisis on individual responsebility, some of what most of the EU countries could use a bit more temselves.

That does not change the fact, however, that the terms used by you are completly dissorted in their meaning and in parts pitted against each other or thrown together in ways that make absolutely no sense, neither from a political nor economical POV.

Labelling socialism as lacking law, for exaple, is so off it boggles the mind, and makes only sense if you take the far right capitalistic government system of the US as the absolute truth. Which of course, it is not, like anything else on this planet based on ideology.

The problem with your theory is that dictators never give up their power, whereas Bush is going to walk away from it voluntarily come this February.

And he's right. The Constitution IS just a GD piece of paper. It's the laws and ideals that are written on it which are important, not the document itself.

Wow, this post made my jaw drop. Do you have any idea what you just said? He isn't walking away voluntarily, due to that so called "GD piece of paper" he can't stay more than 8 years, I assure you he would if he could.

You need to hit the library, that "GD piece of paper" known as the constitution is the reason we are not having this conversation in People's Factory Number 517...

And you need to take a reading comprehension course. I have bolded the relevant part for you. Do you seriously think that if the Constitution document should say burn up in a fire that we don't have a Constitution any more? :roll:

I didn't say socialism lacks law. If anything, as I understand it, it is more intrusive. So if I took off on a tangent, which I do from time to time, sorry.

But if you look at it, Socialism, Communism, Fascism, and Capitalism are all capitalist. Who "owns" the capital is the difference. Your capital is your means of production. Now if the US Gov. gets it's hands in the mix, it's a recipe for disaster. It takes our foundations and pushes them closer to the edge of the window. Especially since the primary job of the US Gov. is to secure and protect the rights of the people. Not to give them or take them away. Our rights according to the Declaration of Independence come from the Creator. Not from government.
"...that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Amongst them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
"....that to secure these rights, governments are instituted amongst men."

Thankyou for the compliments on our attitudes of independence, liberty and personal responsibility. But it (responsibility) too is lacking here. On the financial end, how many people use bankruptcy as a way of getting out of their debts. Or how many people think the government owes them. We used to have thing here called debtors prison, and believe it or not, quite a few of the founders spent time there.

I really railed on a close friend who ran up thousands in business investments and then had the audacity to say that it was his right to file bankruptcy since he couldn't afford them. Most of it was in advertising, so the salesreps for these advertisers are guilty of misleading him, but as I told him, he is the most responsible as he is the one who signed off on the contract without thinking it through thoroughly. I was really steamed with this, as he came to me for council on this, and we went over the flagging economy, the fact that when the markets fall into trouble, he is going to fall on hard times. If the people with money don't have it to spend, what is going to happen to the general populace? And trust me, I'm no economist, I never studied it, other than the general education supplied by the public schools (at the time called civics), and recommended reading by my instructors. I couldn't afford college, nor could my folks, and back then, there wasn't common knowledge of grants, and government assistance for advanced schooling. See I did it again.

And I do not harbor any ill will toward the forms of government other countries posess. But to try to integrate them into our form of a Constitutional Republic is counter to what it was founded as. But for the last 90 years our country has been referred to as a democracy, as it is taught that way in the school system, which is incorrect according to the founders. So from a very early age children are indoctrinated to believe a false form. Even Thomas Jefferson who started the "Democratic Republican Party" never referred to our nation as a democracy, nor did Hamilton, Franklin, Madison, Jay, or the other men who argued over what we should have, once independence was secured.

But the more involved the government here gets with business, the closer to a totalitarian system we get. Whether it be any one of them.