Obama's purge of top military brass...

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

When I read this I was thinking of you Bubblehead, by the way did you know that the word bubblehead is a negative term that surface craft sailors call submarine sailors? Oh well too late to change your name now, but please read this and know that you are not the only person that makes mistakes.

I've even made one or two myself :
http://progressiveandproud.wordpress.com/2013/09/21/if-acaobamacare-is-implemented-the-government-will-spy-on-me-and-have-access-to-my-bank-account/



This article as helpful as it is ... is about ACA/obamacare so I will post it over there too

Progressive and proud.
I couldn't help but notice. You do realize that by citing a source on the opposite end of the poltical scale (a blog no less), your showing the exact same "qualities" as the person your chastising, with an equally "reputable" source to boot.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

I don't have time to type them all currently but there are quite a few racist quotes in that book, just shows his mentality.One that sticks out if where he talks about avoiding being seen with white students when he was in college, to "avoid being mistaken for a sell out". Referred to his paternal grandfather as a "house ******"(his words)

I remember him talking about working in capitalist system as "working behind enemy lines" , that he felt like a sell out.

"I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites."

There are plenty of others, READ the book, everyone should.

I don't want to hear about context, that has been the excuse, they try to argue some things were taken out of context.No, it shows his attitude when he authored the book.Attitudes that are still there going by his race baiting behavior.I will update post when have time.

On the supposed racist comments in his books:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/coilofrage.asp

On him being a Marxist:

According to Marxism, class warfare is necessary to achieve a utopian, classless society where all means of production are commonly owned. Socialism (based on Marxism) advocates collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and there is no private property. Communism (based on Marxism) advocates elimination of private property, in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed. It is a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production.

Where is BO pushing class warfare and state ownership of all means of production? I've heard rhetoric but no evidence.

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

Stellar... und now 'das enden' this thread which has become uninteresting, beyond the pale, and of no perceivable further intellectual pursuit in the otherwise enlighted threads of or we can get back to Patton...und beer! (where's a moderator when it's really time)[/SIZE][/SIZE]

Did i say something that wasn't true? I was just calling that post out as I saw it. In my opinion, this thread was over at page one.

Originally Posted by TarJak

On him being a Marxist:

According to Marxism, class warfare is necessary to achieve a utopian, classless society where all means of production are commonly owned. Socialism (based on Marxism) advocates collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and there is no private property. Communism (based on Marxism) advocates elimination of private property, in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed. It is a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production.

Where is BO pushing class warfare and state ownership of all means of production? I've heard rhetoric but no evidence.

I think almost any Marxist would say that class warfare was 'inevitable' rather than 'necessary' - and argue that there was nothing 'utopian' about the end result. And no, 'Communism' (as Marx foresaw it) wasn't ' a totalitarian system of government' - it was a society with no state/government/party at all. Of course, one can (and should) point out that those advocating Marxist ideas (or claiming to) may not have actually got very far down the road to abolishing 'government' (or actually wanted to) - but Marx himself was no advocate of totalitarianism.

No he's right.

How so Betonov?
His implication is that you must be paying exorbitant amounts of tax to recieve the level of services which he doesn't get.
The reality is that if he had a job he would be paying comparable rates of tax but not be getting the services.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

I think almost any Marxist would say that class warfare was 'inevitable' rather than 'necessary' - and argue that there was nothing 'utopian' about the end result. And no, 'Communism' (as Marx foresaw it) wasn't ' a totalitarian system of government' - it was a society with no state/government/party at all. Of course, one can (and should) point out that those advocating Marxist ideas (or claiming to) may not have actually got very far down the road to abolishing 'government' (or actually wanted to) - but Marx himself was no advocate of totalitarianism.

So BO is a Marxist who believes in big government?

Originally Posted by TarJak

So BO is a Marxist who believes in big government?

Does that mean the tea baggers are marxist because they believe in no government?

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Nixon did resign to avoid the show trial by the Democrats and his enemies in the Republican party.

I don't think so. He resigned because he faced almost certain impeachment and removal from office. 43 people convicted, some of them were top administration officials in his government.

Did some things he should not have done

Yea, he broke the law.

Yes, but Reagan had a good reason, we were "fighting" the cold war, he spent money, rebuilt our military, made us stronger and accelerated the end of the cold war.Really, no coincidence Soviet Union collapsed not long after he left office.

There were multiple reasons for the breakup of the U.S.S.R. Chernobyl, Afghanistan, Glasnost and others but U.S. military strength had little to do with it.

Instead of screwing around with them as every President had done since 45, he chose to "fight" them.This saved us in long run from spending trillions more over another 20 or 30 years or more screwing around, so occurring debt was is excusable if it helps in long run.

Reagan started a military spending spree which has lasted to this day and has put your country in financial difficulty. It was unnecessary.

Difference is, obama with his relatively short time in office, has accounted for close to or at 40% of the total US debt and we have nothing to show for it but that debt and weakness and he has no plans to stop, he will just spend, spend, spend.Economy is still weak, unemployment high. Don't go there, you have no argument.

I am not defending Obama.

extreme deregulation that i believe Billy Boy Clinton implemented

One of the four points of Reagan's economic policy was to reduce government regulation. He got the ball rollin'.

Reagan left office with a 64% approval rating and is remembered as one of the best by most for a reason, he was just that.

If those people knew what we know...

[Schroeder]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

How so Betonov?

I think he was sarcastic.

[mookiemookie]

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by u crank

I don't think so. He resigned because he faced almost certain impeachment and removal from office. 43 people convicted, some of them were top administration officials in his government.



Yea, he broke the law.




There were multiple reasons for the breakup of the U.S.S.R. Chernobyl, Afghanistan, Glasnost and others but U.S. military strength had little to do with it.



Reagan started a military spending spree which has lasted to this day and has put your country in financial difficulty. It was unnecessary.



I am not defending Obama.



One of the four points of Reagan's economic policy was to reduce government regulation. He got the ball rollin'.



If those people knew what we know...

You are clueless.Where are you from again?

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by TarJak

On the supposed racist comments in his books:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/coilofrage.asp

On him being a Marxist:

According to Marxism, class warfare is necessary to achieve a utopian, classless society where all means of production are commonly owned. Socialism (based on Marxism) advocates collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and there is no private property. Communism (based on Marxism) advocates elimination of private property, in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed. It is a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production.

Where is BO pushing class warfare and state ownership of all means of production? I've heard rhetoric but no evidence.

Okay, overall snopes is NOT a legitimate source, given it's ties to the Annenberg Foundation and other groups, sorry and naturally, they try to cover for his outright racism in Dreams From My Father by claiming things were cherry picked and taken out of context, which is in most cases and especially this one, a cop out when she someone is called out for saying something wrong.Yes, some quotes many have attributed are not in the book but many are, including the one about not being seen as a "sell out" for being around white people.Another one that snopes lies and tries to cover for is where in the Audacity of Hope, he said he would stand with muslims.They tried to say it was taken out of context.True, he said he would stand with "them", referring to muslims, which is a disturbing quote. Snopes does not deny some of these quotes are there, but of course tries to cover for him, it's propaganda, nothing more.

No way around it, I read the book, many of the lines are in there.

Okay, have to understand that when I speak of marxism, I am speaking of it in the manner in which obama and others like him see marxism and apply it to their politics, their ideology is not pure marxism, its based on marxism but that fact alone means they are marxists.They believe in class warfare, state ownership over the means of production, they achieve this through big government . The most basic core belief for them is they seek to protect the collective over the individual, which is in direct conflict with the American tradition, especially as founded.The United States is about the INDIVIDUAL right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.Individual rights take precedent over the collective, but in ensuring the individual rights, the collective is better off.Freedom of speech protects the INDIVIDUAL, even if what he or she is saying something 90% of us disagree with, which goes against the collective, same with economic freedom, it may not be good for everyone in some regards, but it leaves it up to each individual, not the government. This respect for individual rights extends to all areas and was respected for a long time.Slowly though, with the cancer of marxist based ideologies being spread around, a significant part of our population have lost respect for this, thus the political battles we are still fighting.I mean, this collectivism can be seen in obamacare, admitted to by admin officials.The law was knowingly set up so that younger, healthy people pay more on their policies, so to cover others.They see this as well it is good for the collective, to hell with the individual right to one's own money and to determine if he/she needs this healthcare.That is wrong, shameful, and absolutely goes against the basic spirit of this country.

While Obama does not preach marxism outright(he would be extremely unpopular if he did) and not saying he is a "traditional" one, but more of an American one.A "progressive" if you will. They have put an American spin on things but he had no problem buying up GM(means of production?) BO does not push class warfare? LOL are you kidding? Nearly every time he speaks relating to taxes etc he talks about rich people paying more.Talks about it is people's duty lol, come on man, the tactics he used? 2012 election? Come on now. Obama is a class warrior, which is ironic because he has been made pretty well off in last few years but since he is not old money(well not in the american sense) he sees himself as part of this perceived struggle.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Bubblehead1980

Okay, overall snopes is NOT a legitimate source, given it's ties to the Annenberg Foundation and other groups,

So you're saying their quotes are lies and yours are the truth? Somebody has it wrong. Somebody is indeed twisting the context. You've defended your sources by saying that it doesn't matter if the source is suspect, what matters is that in this case it's telling the truth. Are their quotes accurate, or are they twisting what he said?

sorry and naturally, they try to cover for his outright racism in Dreams From My Father by claiming things were cherry picked and taken out of context, which is in most cases and especially this one, a cop out when she someone is called out for saying something wrong.

So were those things cherry-picked? Were they altered? Are your quotes accurate? Are theirs? That's all that really matters.

Yes, some quotes many have attributed are not in the book but many are, including the one about not being seen as a "sell out" for being around white people.

So some of the things you've been "quoting" from the book are actually lies?

Another one that snopes lies and tries to cover for is where in the Audacity of Hope, he said he would stand with muslims.They tried to say it was taken out of context.True, he said he would stand with "them", referring to muslims, which is a disturbing quote.

If they quoted accurately, what he actually said was that he would stand with Arab and Pakistani Americans who were afraid of reprisals and harrassment by the FBI and other federal organizations simply because of their past. He compared that possibility to the WW2 interment camps and said he would "stand with them should the political wind shift in an ugly direction".

That sounds to me like he's promising to take care of American citizens should the country turn against them because of their background. Nothing was said about Muslims, and nothing was said about supporting the enemy. I don't find that disturbing at all. What I find disturbing is that you could misread that so badly, or that you could get it so backwards.

Or was Snopes lying about that quote?

No way around it, I read the book, many of the lines are in there.

But many of them are indeed twisted to give the wrong effect, which you never bothered to point out. Have you also lied about those quotes?

[Bubblehead1980]

Originally Posted by Betonov

No he's right.

15% of my pay is income tax. Some percentage is also payed as social security. Basic healthcare insurance is payed by my employer.

I'd say about 24% of my monthly wage is going to the state.
A quarter of my pay to save my life, educate me, keep the roads maintained and provide me with security (police, firefighters, rescue services, army) is an outrages amount of tax. I feel abused.



Student debt is uncommon here.
Someone else pays the tab ?? Yes, it's called a taxpayer and it's also called an investment into the future. Highly educated workforce makes more money and pays more tax. Plus, to understand why we're not complaining by paying taxes for education and healthcare of others you have to understand something called SOLIDARITY.
And what do we get after slaving away at our job to pay those taxes ??
A well educated workforce that is dept free and can start a future without feeding the banks first.




Less people make less money for the state. We're playing this game on a bit higher difficulty.

Wow, 24% of your hard earned money, goes to the government, you have no say.That should anger you!

Guess what, I get all the services you do for for less than 24% of my monthly income.

Solidarity? Sounds like some collective thought to me. What about the individual right to their own money? To self determination? That is the difference.I will never forget my first check at this firm I worked for, I would say roughly 12% in taxes were taken out between state and federal.I was angry, that is money I earned.Wasted away by the government.That just goes against everything this country is supposed to be, it makes my stomach turn.

Yes, less people but a high tax rate, so plenty of money with a smaller population it seems.This US brings in a ton of money but such a large population, fact is some will go without, its just the natural course of events.

[Oberon]

Words fail me...