RRC Archives

I don't think this is a partisan thing so much as the government in general seeing potential for a MASSIVE revenue stream and trying to get their hands on it.

michaelarmand wrote:

clif wrote:such a simplistic fallacy. isn't law enforcement a direct indicator of the limits on freedom and the most unassailable government institution?

There is a big difference between anarchy and constitutional republic with limited power allocated to the federal government. You pay any attention in your high school american history class? Or maybe your school stopped teaching it (many have). Anyway, go read some of the federalist papers...

so you support public education? is that conservative or not?

kato wrote:I don't think this is a partisan thing so much as the government in general seeing potential for a MASSIVE revenue stream and trying to get their hands on it.

lol...yeah...just wait until we pay usage taxes by the GB

kato- when the govt is majority interest holder of GM and Chrysler ( can you say we want the unions under our control) the banks, funny how obama was Wallstreet's largest benefactor, healthcare overhaul, can you say SEIU?? I knew you could... well you get the picture and it doesn't matter what any whacko pole smoking tree hugging son of tricky dickie says- the facts speak for themselves- the administration is a socialist based powergrabbing bunch of chicago criminals- but you can hope for change cuz oh yes we can oh yes we can??!!! LOL victims ,certainly hope you don't have kids because you shouldn't be able to look them in the eyes if you voted for this inept buffoon

im getting pretty tired of the 'socialist' word being thrown around so much by obama haters. nobody cares. besides, it sounds so extreme that it kind of undermines any message that you might actually have (besides the "we still hate obama" message--we know, get over it). he's not a socialist, he's your president. and let's not forget that the alternative to 'obama/biden' was 'grandfather time/miss america'.... (if that's the best that can be offered, well, then there's a clear place to point fingers...)

we're not a socialism, we're a broken & fucked-up democracy (same as always). and we're capitalists. that won't change. get over it.

point taken, point ignored, get over it and it will become apparent in Nov if your viewpoint that no one cares is true or not- we will have to await the future- unless you have some crystal ball that would actually add any credence to your blabberings

pass the Cheezits

socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Obama is a socialist. He wasn't the Socialist Party USA candidate, but that does not preclude his socialist agenda.

Calling him a socialist is not an attack so much as labeling his political history and agenda. It only gets lefties' panties all bunched up because it is true.

Obama brokered a deal that gave the UAW (a union of workers) controlling interest in the company for which the worked. Workers collectively owning the business they work for is definitive socialism.

Obama has purchased a large portion of GM for government ownership. Government ownership is, well, more communist than socialist.

Under Obamacare, he nationalized all student loans. That entire industry is now government run. Again, socialist and borderline communist.

Obama has repeatedly tried to gain control over the banking industry. I'm not talking about failing banks. I'm talking about the ability to fail banks. He has continually tried to get the power to force banks to fail or to take control of banks because he says they will fail. More communism.

So...we can continue to use the term socialists which is what a lot of his political tendencies are. Or we can start calling him a communist which he has a great history to back that up.

If you have any facts or evidence that speaks to the contrary, feel free to bring them up. Simply being "tired" of the word does not change it.

+1

Xtant wrote:Obama brokered a deal that gave the UAW (a union of workers) controlling interest in the company for which the worked. Workers collectively owning the business they work for is definitive socialism.

i went to a restaurant that did this, too. the workers, kitchen staff, bartenders, all own the restaurant the day they get hired. pretty neat. they're now one of the most successful restaurants in town (~30 years now). people are dying to work there.

i just have never heard (by any critic, ever) how obama's agenda is actually going to harm the people. socialist? whatever, fine--if it creates positive change, im all for it. let's not forget that we're still a capitalist country, and, again, that won't change.

until i start hearing something other than name-calling, i'm not really going to listen (and neither will anyone else, except for the choir to which they preach).

so, again... how's it going to screw us all up? i hear a lot of doomsday talk, but nobody ever wants to elaborate. just namecalling and torch waving [see: tea party]

come now! tea-partiers, palin-lovers, criticizers... im graciously giving all obama-haters a chance to objectively justify their hatred! if im convinced, you will decide my vote for the next election!

okay, i'm ready. im listening.