Is obama a socilist, or a fascist?

[edthecynic]

One final thought, conservatives are not fascists nor socialists for the simple reason they abhor state control and ability of state to expropriate at will. The conservative movement is the anthesis to fascism. Part of the problem people have in understanding the differences is due to the media and political rhetoric of the left. Their sole purpose behind the use of fascist to describe conservatives....is to scare people, like the pan handler that yells fuck you when you pass without contributing to his fund.

Bullshit!

In Fascism there are only 2 sides, their side and the enemy. CON$ervatism is pure Fascism.

The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.
Adolf Hitler

May 12, 2008
RUSH: I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats. Because, by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate, not independent, it's going to be liberal

 

[Sky Dancer]

Obama is a tool of the banking industry and corporations, just like every other President before him.

 

[Foxfyre]

To me, Obama is mostly Marxist. I think that was included in his upbringing and reinforced in those 20 or so years that he was tutored in liberation theology at the knee of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. I do not think he loves his country or has any concept of American exceptionalism, but rather sees his Presidency as the vehicle to push us closer to the Marxist utopia that he sees through a glass darkly.

The process to get to a Marxist utopia of necessity requires embracing a period of socialism and also some facist tactics to wrest control from the people and place it with the dictator or other strong central totalitarian government who will finally be able to implement the utopian concepts. Obama's latest countermanding of the immigration laws via executive order is just one more nut and bolt in the process.

Almost all dictators/totalitarian governments come to power by promising great concepts, thus the people initially support the dictator. Unfortunately, once the dictator achieves the power, he or they find they like having it and never get to the part where the power is given back to the people to live in utopian peace and plenty.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Obama is a socialist because he says as much in his books. In his actions, he's more of a fascist out of necessity. If he was given total power to enact all he wanted to, we'd see that he is truely a socialist.

He's a socialist because he says he is. It doesn't matter that he hasn't been able to enact the socialist policies he wants to. I'm a Libertarian, but just because I haven't enacted any Libertarain policies doesn't mean I'm not.

At what age was he socialist, PredFan. People change.

And by your standards, the deist Thomas Jefferson was a christian, because he said he was.

You have to put things in context, and you have not done that.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Conservatism and Fascism share the same political family tree, their roots being the dogma of Social Darwinism of the late 19th Century. Conservatism and Fascism also share the same need for conformity, the same authoritarianism, and as noted in the article below, the same nationalistic fervor:

Flirting with Fascism | The American Conservative

 

[PredFan]

Obama is a socialist because he says as much in his books. In his actions, he's more of a fascist out of necessity. If he was given total power to enact all he wanted to, we'd see that he is truely a socialist.

He's a socialist because he says he is. It doesn't matter that he hasn't been able to enact the socialist policies he wants to. I'm a Libertarian, but just because I haven't enacted any Libertarain policies doesn't mean I'm not.

At what age was he socialist, PredFan. People change.

And by your standards, the deist Thomas Jefferson was a christian, because he said he was.

You have to put things in context, and you have not done that.

He wrote these books recently. He didn't write them when he was 21. His expression "Spread the wealth around" supports my contention that he still believes in the same things he wrote about.

Perfect context.

 

[Douger]

He's a very well behaved serf.....just like you.

 

[Flopper]

“Socialism. The new “S word”—it’s the worst thing you can call someone. It’s like the “C word” and the “N word” had a baby.”

—Comrade Jon Stewart

Id rather be called the N word. Straight shot homie!

Categorical labeling contributes to some of the deepest problems that face us as humans. It's an attempt to put people in nice little labeled boxes, to stereotype. Every president is a socialist, fascist, and capitalist. The degree depends as much on events as they do the philosophies of the president. Obama certainly believes government should help people, but I'm quite sure he sees the value that the private sector has added to our society.

Regulating capitalism is in my opinion the most important and difficult task that governments face today. Too little government control leads to social problems and eventual anarchy. To much government control stifles individual initiative.

 

[buckeye45_73]

“Socialism. The new “S word”—it’s the worst thing you can call someone. It’s like the “C word” and the “N word” had a baby.”

—Comrade Jon Stewart

Id rather be called the N word. Straight shot homie!

Categorical labeling contributes to some of the deepest problems that face us as humans. It's an attempt to put people in nice little labeled boxes, to stereotype. Every president is a socialist, fascist, and capitalist. The degree depends as much on events as they do the philosophies of the president. Obama certainly believes government should help people, but I'm quite sure he sees the value that the private sector has added to our society.

Regulating capitalism is in my opinion the most important and difficult task that governments face today. Too little government control leads to social problems and eventual anarchy. To much government control stifles individual initiative.

great post, but what's funny is when those labels are given that diversity is ALREADY taken into account. It's kind of the degree.

I like how liberals always try to get out of the labels, by saying that it's all or nothing. If I bet money that a serial killer was white or a black person would eat fried chicken, of course it's not ALWAYS that way, it's the percentages just work out that way

And if you dont like labels and categories, blame Aritstotle, he started and humans love em. It simplifies things and works better than you're willing to admit.

 

[rdean]

Is obama a socilist, or a fascist?

He's an American.

But I believe Republicans are on the side of al Qaeda.

1. They let Bin Laden go

2. They invited al Qaeda into Iraq

3. They bankupted this nation

4. They sent our troops to Iraq with old and rusty equipmnet

5. Bush said he stopped thinking about Bin Laden

6. They gave no bid contracts in Iraq. Substandard housing was built and troops were electrocuted.

7. They have done nothing for returning veterans

8. They want to cuts benefits for veterans

9. They call the president a "socialist and fascist".

10. When the economy was downgraded they said they got 98% of everything they wanted.

I think the evidence is indisputable.

That's just the top ten. I have lots more. The apology to BP. Sending jobs to China. Let him die. The list is endless.

 

[Flopper]

Yes.

Do you have any idea how many conservatives on this board live to flame.

There are some folks here that after going on 2 years, I have no idea which way they lean politically. I suppose thare are a similar number of Libs who's favorite pass time is flaming. It only seems like you're outnumbered when you're on the losing side.

Oh, no. No. No-no. Conservatives on this board outnumber liberals by a solid two, if not 3-1.

I agree. I wonder if this was the case during the Bush years. The party out of power is always the most vocal and it's always easier to attack than it is to defend.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Is obama a socilist, or a fascist?

He's an American.

But I believe Republicans are on the side of al Qaeda.
1. They let Bin Laden go
Who did?I mean with all the information from waterboarding terrorists to get Bin Laden I guess you like it now, funny how results matter to democrats, except when it comes to their own programs


2. They invited al Qaeda into Iraq

Sorry al Qaeda was already in Iraq before we invaded, another lie

3. They bankupted this nation
So you're against Obama spending more in 4 years than Bush did in 8, I'm glad you see our side of it finally.

4. They sent our troops to Iraq with old and rusty equipmnet
And I guess you're agaisnt cutting defense then, need that NEW equipment

5. Bush said he stopped thinking about Bin Laden

yep, he did, didnt say he stopped going after him, but you'll probably belive they did, but somehow Obama just started it right back up and got no information from "interrogation". tell me when you see a unicorn

6. They gave no bid contracts in Iraq. Substandard housing was built and troops were electrocuted.
please give a link on this. You're for getting rid of no bid contracts? Run that by Pelosi and Reid and watch them laugh at you

7. They have done nothing for returning veterans
At least they dont spit on them

8. They want to cuts benefits for veterans
http://militaryadvantage.military.com/2011/10/mccain-okay-with-cutting-military-benefits/ SAys McCain joined OBAMA on cuts

9. They call the president a "socialist and fascist".
Truth hurts

10. When the economy was downgraded they said they got 98% of everything they wanted.
WTF give a link

I think the evidence is indisputable.What evidence?

That's just the top ten. I have lots more. The apology to BP. Sending jobs to China. Let him die. The list is endless.

Dean do you just get the feed from the Huff Post? I mean you're posts are boring.

And I love smacking you down like a midget wrestler.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Obama is a socialist because he says as much in his books. In his actions, he's more of a fascist out of necessity. If he was given total power to enact all he wanted to, we'd see that he is truely a socialist.

He's a socialist because he says he is. It doesn't matter that he hasn't been able to enact the socialist policies he wants to. I'm a Libertarian, but just because I haven't enacted any Libertarain policies doesn't mean I'm not.

At what age was he socialist, PredFan. People change.

And by your standards, the deist Thomas Jefferson was a christian, because he said he was.

You have to put things in context, and you have not done that.

He wrote these books recently. He didn't write them when he was 21. His expression "Spread the wealth around" supports my contention that he still believes in the same things he wrote about.

Perfect context.

In other words, you don't give page and book.

In other words, you make up your own definitions: "spread the wealth around" is not socialism.

You are entitled to your own opinion but not to making up your own definitions.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Id rather be called the N word. Straight shot homie!

Categorical labeling contributes to some of the deepest problems that face us as humans. It's an attempt to put people in nice little labeled boxes, to stereotype. Every president is a socialist, fascist, and capitalist. The degree depends as much on events as they do the philosophies of the president. Obama certainly believes government should help people, but I'm quite sure he sees the value that the private sector has added to our society.

Regulating capitalism is in my opinion the most important and difficult task that governments face today. Too little government control leads to social problems and eventual anarchy. To much government control stifles individual initiative.

great post, but what's funny is when those labels are given that diversity is ALREADY taken into account. It's kind of the degree.

I like how liberals always try to get out of the labels, by saying that it's all or nothing. If I bet money that a serial killer was white or a black person would eat fried chicken, of course it's not ALWAYS that way, it's the percentages just work out that way

And if you dont like labels and categories, blame Aritstotle, he started and humans love em. It simplifies things and works better than you're willing to admit.

All true until libertarians and the far right (Oddball, Pale Rider, NeoTrotsky) want to make up their own definitions and insist we accept them despite historical and political tradition and narrative.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Categorical labeling contributes to some of the deepest problems that face us as humans. It's an attempt to put people in nice little labeled boxes, to stereotype. Every president is a socialist, fascist, and capitalist. The degree depends as much on events as they do the philosophies of the president. Obama certainly believes government should help people, but I'm quite sure he sees the value that the private sector has added to our society.

Regulating capitalism is in my opinion the most important and difficult task that governments face today. Too little government control leads to social problems and eventual anarchy. To much government control stifles individual initiative.

great post, but what's funny is when those labels are given that diversity is ALREADY taken into account. It's kind of the degree.

I like how liberals always try to get out of the labels, by saying that it's all or nothing. If I bet money that a serial killer was white or a black person would eat fried chicken, of course it's not ALWAYS that way, it's the percentages just work out that way

And if you dont like labels and categories, blame Aritstotle, he started and humans love em. It simplifies things and works better than you're willing to admit.

All true until libertarians and the far right (Oddball, Pale Rider, NeoTrotsky) want to make up their own definitions and insist we accept them despite historical and political tradition and narrative.

Sorry, didnt make em up. You have two main idelological concepts. American and European, which are somewhat related but have different historical reasons. The left Wing admires Marx, Rousseau, Debois, Keynes and the French Revolution. The right admires, Burke, Smith, Raynd, Hayek and the American Revolution. An over simplification, but that's the point. Due tell us your thoughts?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nonsense, my little narrative twister. You equate The Far Left with the Left, and by implication, the mainstream democrats. The rational left also admires Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Paine, Locke, Lincoln, and so forth. Just like the right does.

Please don't try to revise history as if it is your own particular little garden to hoe. NeoTrotsky is a failed "farmer" at that as well.

 

[buckeye45_73]

Nonsense, my little narrative twister. You equate The Far Left with the Left, and by implication, the mainstream democrats. The rational left also admires Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Paine, Locke, Lincoln, and so forth. Just like the right does.

See, you don't get to revise history as if it is your own particular little garden to hoe.

Ok, explain the rational left and the far left to me? I'm talking about as it is NOW. Not things like classical liberalism. I'm a conservative, that IS a classical liberal (hence I dont support monarchy and am for as much freedom as possible) Who is rational liberal and who is far left?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nonsense, my little narrative twister. You equate The Far Left with the Left, and by implication, the mainstream democrats. The rational left also admires Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Paine, Locke, Lincoln, and so forth. Just like the right does.

See, you don't get to revise history as if it is your own particular little garden to hoe.

Ok, explain the rational left and the far left to me? I'm talking about as it is NOW. Not things like classical liberalism. I'm a conservative, that IS a classical liberal (hence I dont support monarchy and am for as much freedom as possible) Who is rational liberal and who is far left?

No, you made the claim about the left, so it is your row to hoe, failed farmer.

And if you are talking about NOW, then your examples FROM BACK THEN don't count.

You are not a Classical Liberal if you are suggesting that such do not exist to the left of center as they do to the right of center. Classical Liberals tell the truth.

 

[Staidhup]

One final thought, conservatives are not fascists nor socialists for the simple reason they abhor state control and ability of state to expropriate at will. The conservative movement is the anthesis to fascism. Part of the problem people have in understanding the differences is due to the media and political rhetoric of the left. Their sole purpose behind the use of fascist to describe conservatives....is to scare people, like the pan handler that yells fuck you when you pass without contributing to his fund.

Bullshit!

In Fascism there are only 2 sides, their side and the enemy. CON$ervatism is pure Fascism.

The leader of genius must have the ability to make different opponents appear as if they belonged to one category.
Adolf Hitler

May 12, 2008
RUSH: I maintain that moderates and independents are Democrats. Because, by definition, if someone or some organization is not conservative, it's by definition going to be liberal, not moderate, not independent, it's going to be liberal

Apparently, regardless of facts you continue to spin like a top. It would be interesting to know your educational background. You appear to be well versed an infatuated with Rush and Hitler, yet not a historian or economist by training, puzzling to say the least.

 

[JakeStarkey]

When listening to Rush, pretend he is a sound mirror, to mix concepts.

See if he is describing himself and his followers as he attacks his opponents.