Is the Democrat Party the CPUSA in Disguise?

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Jul 5, 2004
13,399
1,706
245
June 19, 2008

It’s no secret that Democrats are liberal, but when you peel away their devotion to environmental policies that have left America vulnerable to foreign nations on whom we depend for the importation of oil, what has been revealed is an intention to nationalize our nation’s oil industry. That, simply stated, is communism.

One might expect members of the Communist Party USA to advocate the nationalization of our oil companies, but hearing it from the lips of Democrat Party members of the House of Representatives should send a chill of fear through every American.

It was the former Soviet Union’s reliance on revenue from its nationalized oil industry that proved to be a major factor in the collapse of that totalitarian regime. It is, in large part, Russia’s nationalized oil and national gas industry that props up the current regime, a thinly disguised resurrection of the former communist party.

Having invited foreign, privately-owned oil companies to help revitalize their industry, the current leadership in Russia ruthlessly abrogated the original contracts to deprive them of much of their initial investment. Russian oil and natural gas company executives who resisted either fled to self-imposed exile or were jailed.

Russia has since sought to coerce European and former satellite nations by threatening to withhold the oil and natural gas on which they depend.

The nationalization of Venezuela’s oil industry by a communist regime led by Hugo Chavez is currently destroying that nation’s economy. Most of the oil in the world is under the control of nationalized industries. U.S. oil companies, combined, own only four percent of the world’s known oil reserves.

At a June 18 press conference, however, Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) called for the government to nationalize and own refineries, threatening U.S. oil companies with nationalization. “We should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.” Earlier, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) had also threatened oil company executives with nationalization.

In a demonstration of a complete lack of understanding of how the marketplace for oil operates, nationally and globally, Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV) said, “You cannot drill your way out of this.” Exploring for and drilling oil is precisely the way to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil!

Rahall is the chairman of the Resources Committee and is apparently ignorant of the fact that the U.S. has literally billions of barrels of oil untapped in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, off the continental shelf of the nation’s vast coastlines, and in many States.

Florida, for example, long resistant to permitting off-shore drilling, has discovered that the high price of gasoline is forcing many Americans to abandon plans to drive to Florida for vacations there. Meanwhile, China has joined with Cuba to explore and drill for oil barely 90 miles or less off the coast of Florida. Similar energy policies in California caused its largest utility to go bankrupt and has deprived its citizens of a reliable supply of energy.

The Democrat nominee for President, Sen. Barack Obama, has called for a windfall profits tax on U.S. oil companies, but in 1980 such a tax, before it was repealed, led to the three decades of decline in oil production in the United States. U.S. oil companies do not control the price of oil, a global commodity sold on mercantile exchanges around the world. Their profits are less than those currently being enjoyed by the pharmaceutical industry, high tech industries, and financial and banking firms nationwide.

It was former President Clinton who refused to allow exploration and drilling in ANWR in the 1990s and it has been a Democrat-controlled Congress that has resisted President Bush’s call to allow access to the estimated seven billion barrels of oil untapped beneath ANWR.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) deliberately sought to mislead Americans into believing that the oil leases held by U.S. oil companies mean that they could drill tomorrow to produce oil, but neglected to mention that oil leases are no guarantee that any oil would be found. A high percentage of wells that are drilled come up empty. It is a highly speculative and highly expensive business to find and extract oil.

This brings us to the fact that a vast matrix of environmental legislation slows the process by which oil can be accessed and, later, refined for use by consumers. The U.S. has not allowed a new refinery to be built in more than three decades as a result of this legislation. It takes, on the average, ten years between finding oil and making it available to consumers.

Voters paying $4 a gallon can thank the Democrat Party’s alliance with environmental organizations for the failure and refusal to allow access to our national reserves of oil and natural gas. Lying about it and shifting blame to the oil companies does not change this fundamental truth.

The past actions of the Democrat Party and the assertions by several Democrat members of Congress represent the true face of the party and its close resemblance to the Communist Party USA should be a cause for grave concern in the forthcoming national elections.

CFP: Is the Democrat Party the CPUSA in Disguise?
 
Anyone who thinks that the Dems resemble the communist party wouldn't know communism if it came up and bit them on the ass.

So explain how the Dems are so much different from socialist commies.....?
 
right after you get to explaining how the GOP is not a modern front for fascism...
 
don't point a finger at me after having sold our country to rich saudi princes, dude.
 
question:
Is the Democrat Party the CPUSA in Disguise?

answer:
he simple and truthful answer is NO.

-----------------------------------------------------

I've actually been to CPUSA meeting. Have any of you?
:lol:
 
question:
Is the Democrat Party the CPUSA in Disguise?

answer:
he simple and truthful answer is NO.

-----------------------------------------------------

I've actually been to CPUSA meeting. Have any of you?
:lol:

How can you be so sure? True, they are not "exactly" one and the same....but they are definitely on the same course....a step-by-step process....was not their push for "windfall profits" (arbitrary confiscation of profits) and now.... talk about the nationalization of oil...... both huge steps in that direction....?

Atlas Shrieked said:
The Dems sent troops into Vietnam to battle the bastards?
lol...what year were you born? 1998?
 
How can you be so sure? True, they are not "exactly" one and the same....but they are definitely on the same course....a step-by-step process....was not their push for "windfall profits" (arbitrary confiscation of profits) and now.... talk about the nationalization of oil...... both huge steps in that direction....?


lol...what year were you born? 1998?
on a message board filled with adults, posts like yours would warrant a deafening silence.

lol

who sent the combat troops into 'nam to battle the commies?

and the whole commie threat thing is so old.

your peers must be laughing at your quaint ideas
 
but they are definitely on the same course....a step-by-step process....was not their push for "windfall profits" (arbitrary confiscation of profits) and now.... talk about the nationalization of oil...... both huge steps in that direction....?

I don't think a windfall tax is a good idea. At least I haven't heard any argument for why it would be.

Now nationalizing our oil resources might actually be a good idea ...at least to the extent that any oil pumped out of American lands must be sold in the american market.

But there's no need to nationalize the companies who actually get that oil out of our lands.

Just OUR oil...it is after all, already THE NATION'S OIL, right?
 
on a message board filled with adults, posts like yours would warrant a deafening silence.

lol

who sent the combat troops into 'nam to battle the commies?

and the whole commie threat thing is so old.

your peers must be laughing at your quaint ideas

OK, I'll bite...what exactly is "quaint" about them?
 
I don't think a windfall tax is a good idea. At least I haven't heard any argument for why it would be.

Now nationalizing our oil resources might actually be a good idea ...at least to the extent that any oil pumped out of American lands must be sold in the american market.

But there's no need to nationalize the companies who actually get that oil out of our lands.

Just OUR oil...it is after all, already THE NATION'S OIL, right?

Right, how can we "nationalize" something that we already own nationally? :lol:
 
question:
Is the Democrat Party the CPUSA in Disguise?

answer:
he simple and truthful answer is NO.

-----------------------------------------------------

I've actually been to CPUSA meeting. Have any of you?
:lol:

Why does that not surprise me in the least?
 
So explain how the Dems are so much different from socialist commies.....?

Sorry, the comparison is idiotic.

Communism is a philosophy where all the productive assets are held by the state. As much as I think nationalizing the refining industry is stupid as hell, if they did so, they would be no different than the social democratic parties of Western Europe up until the 1980s which nationalized a wide array of industries, from oil to food processing to banks, etc. Was the UK communist? West Germany? Spain? Italy? Of course not, but those countries all nationalized industries. Today, they have all nationalized health insurance programs. Thus, its silly to say they are. This also ignores that fact that there are something like 5000 publicly owned utilities in this country, including utilities in solidly Republican cities and counties.

Communists also believe that capitalists exploit labor by capturing what communists call the "surplus value of labor." Because communists view this as exploitation, they believe that no one should hire others, and that workers should have a democratic expression in the means of production embodied by ownership via the state. If you think the Democrats believe the same thing, you are a fool.

The uneducated rhetoric of the far right is embarrassing.
 
Last edited:
http://www.politics1.com/parties.htm

COMMUNIST PARTY USA - ...........While the party has not directly run any candidates since the late 1980s, the CPUSA sometimes backs some candidates in various local elections (often in Northeastern industrial communities) and engages in grassroots political and labor union organizing. In the 1998 elections,

longtime CPUSA leader Hall actually urged party members to vote for all of the Democratic candidates for Congress -- arguing that voting for any progressive third party candidates would undermine the efforts to oust the "reactionary" Republicans from control of Congress.

As for issues, the CPUSA

calls for free universal health care,

elimination of the federal income tax on people earning under $60,000 a year, free college education,

drastic cuts in military spending, "massive" public works programs,

the outlawing of "scabs and union busting,"

huge tax hikes for corporations and the wealthy,




Any of this crap sound familiar to you liberal Dim assholes.....
 
Last edited:
Politics1 - Guide to American Political Parties

COMMUNIST PARTY USA - ...........While the party has not directly run any candidates since the late 1980s, the CPUSA sometimes backs some candidates in various local elections (often in Northeastern industrial communities) and engages in grassroots political and labor union organizing. In the 1998 elections,

longtime CPUSA leader Hall actually urged party members to vote for all of the Democratic candidates for Congress -- arguing that voting for any progressive third party candidates would undermine the efforts to oust the "reactionary" Republicans from control of Congress.

As for issues, the CPUSA

calls for free universal health care,

elimination of the federal income tax on people earning under $60,000 a year, free college education,

drastic cuts in military spending, "massive" public works programs,

the outlawing of "scabs and union busting,"

huge tax hikes for corporations and the wealthy,




Any of this crap sound familiar to you liberal Dim assholes.....

Should we list the policies supported by the Ku Klux Klan and see how similar they are to conservative policies?
 
June 19, 2008

It’s no secret that Democrats are liberal, but when you peel away their devotion to environmental policies that have left America vulnerable to foreign nations on whom we depend for the importation of oil, what has been revealed is an intention to nationalize our nation’s oil industry. That, simply stated, is communism.

One might expect members of the Communist Party USA to advocate the nationalization of our oil companies, but hearing it from the lips of Democrat Party members of the House of Representatives should send a chill of fear through every American.

It was the former Soviet Union’s reliance on revenue from its nationalized oil industry that proved to be a major factor in the collapse of that totalitarian regime. It is, in large part, Russia’s nationalized oil and national gas industry that props up the current regime, a thinly disguised resurrection of the former communist party.

Having invited foreign, privately-owned oil companies to help revitalize their industry, the current leadership in Russia ruthlessly abrogated the original contracts to deprive them of much of their initial investment. Russian oil and natural gas company executives who resisted either fled to self-imposed exile or were jailed.

Russia has since sought to coerce European and former satellite nations by threatening to withhold the oil and natural gas on which they depend.

The nationalization of Venezuela’s oil industry by a communist regime led by Hugo Chavez is currently destroying that nation’s economy. Most of the oil in the world is under the control of nationalized industries. U.S. oil companies, combined, own only four percent of the world’s known oil reserves.

At a June 18 press conference, however, Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) called for the government to nationalize and own refineries, threatening U.S. oil companies with nationalization. “We should own the refineries. Then we can control how much gets out into the market.” Earlier, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) had also threatened oil company executives with nationalization.

In a demonstration of a complete lack of understanding of how the marketplace for oil operates, nationally and globally, Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV) said, “You cannot drill your way out of this.” Exploring for and drilling oil is precisely the way to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil!

Rahall is the chairman of the Resources Committee and is apparently ignorant of the fact that the U.S. has literally billions of barrels of oil untapped in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, off the continental shelf of the nation’s vast coastlines, and in many States.

Florida, for example, long resistant to permitting off-shore drilling, has discovered that the high price of gasoline is forcing many Americans to abandon plans to drive to Florida for vacations there. Meanwhile, China has joined with Cuba to explore and drill for oil barely 90 miles or less off the coast of Florida. Similar energy policies in California caused its largest utility to go bankrupt and has deprived its citizens of a reliable supply of energy.

The Democrat nominee for President, Sen. Barack Obama, has called for a windfall profits tax on U.S. oil companies, but in 1980 such a tax, before it was repealed, led to the three decades of decline in oil production in the United States. U.S. oil companies do not control the price of oil, a global commodity sold on mercantile exchanges around the world. Their profits are less than those currently being enjoyed by the pharmaceutical industry, high tech industries, and financial and banking firms nationwide.

It was former President Clinton who refused to allow exploration and drilling in ANWR in the 1990s and it has been a Democrat-controlled Congress that has resisted President Bush’s call to allow access to the estimated seven billion barrels of oil untapped beneath ANWR.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) deliberately sought to mislead Americans into believing that the oil leases held by U.S. oil companies mean that they could drill tomorrow to produce oil, but neglected to mention that oil leases are no guarantee that any oil would be found. A high percentage of wells that are drilled come up empty. It is a highly speculative and highly expensive business to find and extract oil.

This brings us to the fact that a vast matrix of environmental legislation slows the process by which oil can be accessed and, later, refined for use by consumers. The U.S. has not allowed a new refinery to be built in more than three decades as a result of this legislation. It takes, on the average, ten years between finding oil and making it available to consumers.

Voters paying $4 a gallon can thank the Democrat Party’s alliance with environmental organizations for the failure and refusal to allow access to our national reserves of oil and natural gas. Lying about it and shifting blame to the oil companies does not change this fundamental truth.

The past actions of the Democrat Party and the assertions by several Democrat members of Congress represent the true face of the party and its close resemblance to the Communist Party USA should be a cause for grave concern in the forthcoming national elections.

CFP: Is the Democrat Party the CPUSA in Disguise?

Well no, they are NOT Communists, but they are ever increasingly Socialistic. And those two are NOT the same.

As for the Dems largely being behind not exploiting our own natural resources, and at the same time largely squashing any new refining or new nuclear power plant, that is largely true, even though absolutely MAXIMIZED would STILL leaves highly dependent on foreign oil. The Dems are firmly in the environmentalis camp, which is essentially the same group of nutballs and extremists behind the Global Warming myth.

But even so, if every known offshore source and shale oil source were under FULL production we would still be 7-8 million barrels a day SHORT of what we consume. Producing that merely LESSENS the pain, not eliminate it. We are 50 years away from true energy independence....and only if we sink every available technological resource we have at the problem...
 
I don't think a windfall tax is a good idea. At least I haven't heard any argument for why it would be.

Now nationalizing our oil resources might actually be a good idea ...at least to the extent that any oil pumped out of American lands must be sold in the american market.

But there's no need to nationalize the companies who actually get that oil out of our lands.

Just OUR oil...it is after all, already THE NATION'S OIL, right?

That makes no sense at all. Say we open offshore, AMWR and Colorado for Shale oil? In five years, with an all-out effort, we could produce another 3million barrels of oil. Your restriction has a net ZERO effect. We would be adding the same 3million barrels a day to the world's supply whether we kept all of it home or shipped it to the world.

The reality is, much of the untapped oil we have here, cannot be refined here, because it's not the right KIND of crude for our refineries.
 

Forum List

Back
Top