Majority of Iraq and Afghanistan Vets Accepting to Serving With Openly Gay Troops

[ski87]

Great, thanks for the statistics update, all great stuff, I have a statistic for you though




100% - Chance of butt stroke to the forehead for any queer that even looks at me the wrong way.

 

[maineman]

He won the endorsement of the Minnesote Democratic Farmer labor Party (DFL), a communist front group

what bullshit. the DFL IS the name of the democratic party in Minnesota. To suggest it is a communist front group is worthy of nothing but laughter

 

[bodecea]

Great, thanks for the statistics update, all great stuff, I have a statistic for you though




100% - Chance of butt stroke to the forehead for any queer that even looks at me the wrong way.

And I suppose you support the right of any female soldier to do the same to you if you look at her the wrong way without invitation?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

He won the endorsement of the Minnesote Democratic Farmer labor Party (DFL), a communist front group

what bullshit. the DFL IS the name of the democratic party in Minnesota. To suggest it is a communist front group is worthy of nothing but laughter

ROFL... Ahh yes... the Flat-nosed contempt for any assertion which speaks to the indefinable notions of Leftism... That hackneyed knee-jerk, reactionary guffaw wherein the opposition chortels disgust against the charge that their closely held feelings are rooted in Collectivism...

Because after all, the Minnesota Democrats are known far and wide for their dogmatic defense of free-market Capitalism and the Individual Liberty which sustains such.

We can rest assured that the assurances from our opposition rests within her direct knowledge of the DFL... We can have NO DOUBT that she's familiar with Communism and it's tendency towards deceit and it's long history of promising Individual Freedom and returning Collective Tyranny.

So... to test that, let's take a gander at a few key elements of the Minnesota DFL 2006-2008 Platform.

The first thing that strikes me, is the cry for that critical element of Left-think; the ethereal; and all too subjective notion of "Fairness":

"At the heart of our party lies a fundamental conviction, that Americans must not only be free, but they must live in a fair society.


We believe it is the responsibility of government to help us achieve this fair society."


Fairness is the critical key to understanding the means by which the voluminous advocacies for all manner of lofty Liberating ideals; advanced through flowery Leftist vaguaries, are summarily snatched back through the much more specific cries for collective control of those things which otherwise set aside those liberties.


The discussion of any fair portion of them would require considerable space, so I'll just hit upon a couple that jumped out at me.

In just the outline of their would-be principles, we find this jewel:


"A society where all people can find jobs in a growing full-employment economy"


Oh that's down the middle American right there... ain't it? I mean that's great stuff... They're looking to secure the means for every individual to 'find jobs' in a growing, FULL EMPLOYMENT Economy...


Then in the next line; there's this:


"A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."


Oops... So in the span of one rhetorical breath, the individual is now relegated to being subservient to the GUARANTEES AFFORDED BY the LEGAL RIGHT OF THE COLLECTIVE; and considerations for those things which are required for a growing economy are simulataneously set aside; rendered secondary to the unquestionable GUARANTEES inherent in such.


Then there's this indecipherable rant:

"A society where both public and private discrimination based upon race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, religion, ethnic identity, sexual orientation, economic status, philosophical persuasion, or discrimination through lawful means."


Moving on...


Then there's this: "A society where we recognize that the strengthening of the family and the protection of children are essential to the health of the nation."


Oh THAT sounds good... What God fearin' American could be against THAT? I mean after all.. "IT'S THE CHILDREN! and the HEALTH OF OUR NATION, MAN!"


"We OPPOSE: Government interference in all matters related to the control of one’s own body, including protection of the rights of women to bear children, practice birth control and obtain safe and legal abortions..."

TALK ABOUT Double-Speak; they frame it as a position which demands the government stay OUT of their rights to murder the unborn child... when in truth; there is NO RIGHT TO MURDER one's unborn child; and what they are demanding is that the government PROVIDE THEM THE GUARANTEE TO DO SO. And after having just spoken to the necessity for a strong family being essential to a viable, sustainable nation.


Poor children... Poor Nation...



And so it goes; where they rant on about the etheral spearation of Church and State; then demand that government tax Churches... Their defense of private property and that governemnt needs to protect the land from the various usuages which may come about through the private ownership of such... and so on.


So we find that the DFL; as was previously noted; is an advocate of the Needs of the Collective superceding the rights of the Individual... OKA: Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, and any of the innumerable revisions/rationalizations inherent in Left-think... and this despite the protestations of the Ideological Left... who need you to believe that such simply does not exist; not in any form, fashion or historical relevance.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Always tickled by the ignorance of the Neo-Left... (Children of the Left...)

When faced with the advocacy denying any communist kinship with Minnesota's Farm Labor Party... I was just cruising through some history of the Farm Labor Movement... and came across this lovely compilation:

FARMER-LABOR PARTY

ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORY

"The first modern Farmer-Labor Party emerged in Minnesota in 1918. ..."

1920

APRIL

“A Yankee Convention,” by Robert Minor. [April 1920] In this article from the pages of The Liberator, Communist Party leader Robert Minor expresses excitement over the growth of the cooperative movement in America, not so much for that trend’s ability to lead to the long-run liberation of the working class, but for its ability to bring together farmers and the urban working class in a common cause.

OCTOBER

"“Radicalism in Amerca,” by Morris Hillquit. [October 15, 1920] This article by Socialist Party NEC member Morris Hillquit in the party’s official organ reviews the two new political organizations to emerge in post-war America—the Labor Party (which transformed itself to the Farmer-Labor Party) and the Communist Party."


1922

MAY

"“Theses on the United Front of Labor,” a confidential document adopted by the Central Executive Committee of the Communist Party of America at its session of May 29, 1922. A fascinating glimpse from the Comintern Archives at the thinking of the governing CEC of the Communist Party with respect to its United Front strategy. The majority of the American proletariat was not conscious of its distinct class interests, the document stated, and could gain awareness—and usefulness to the revolutionary movement —only through its daily struggle over wages, working conditions, etc. ..."

And so on and so forth...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Golly! For some reason, the keen interests in defending the OPs source for the Normalization of Sexual Abnormailty and foisting upon the US Military, the acceptance of the Leftist Advocacy of Homosexuals, into that which stands key to our national defense... thus undermining the effective readiness of that essential element of US Governance... seems to have suddenly dried right up.

Dogbert, could you rally your comrades and get back on point here?

Or did ya not really want to discuss the subversive nature of your closely held feelings?

 

[mal]

There has to be a Pic of Michelle with a Chainsaw!... Tell me there is!...



peace...

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

And....?

Try to drag yourself up into a ditch, strange fly.

 

[bodecea]

And....?

Try to drag yourself up into a ditch, strange fly.

What in the world are you referring to? Your point isn't clear. And your second post is truely puzzling.

 

[maineman]

He won the endorsement of the Minnesote Democratic Farmer labor Party (DFL), a communist front group

what bullshit. the DFL IS the name of the democratic party in Minnesota. To suggest it is a communist front group is worthy of nothing but laughter

ROFL... Ahh yes... the Flat-nosed contempt for any assertion which speaks to the indefinable notions of Leftism... That hackneyed knee-jerk, reactionary guffaw wherein the opposition chortels disgust against the charge that their closely held feelings are rooted in Collectivism...

Because after all, the Minnesota Democrats are known far and wide for their dogmatic defense of free-market Capitalism and the Individual Liberty which sustains such.

We can rest assured that the assurances from our opposition rests within her direct knowledge of the DFL... We can have NO DOUBT that she's familiar with Communism and it's tendency towards deceit and it's long history of promising Individual Freedom and returning Collective Tyranny.

So... to test that, let's take a gander at a few key elements of the Minnesota DFL 2006-2008 Platform.

The first thing that strikes me, is the cry for that critical element of Left-think; the ethereal; and all too subjective notion of "Fairness":

"At the heart of our party lies a fundamental conviction, that Americans must not only be free, but they must live in a fair society.


We believe it is the responsibility of government to help us achieve this fair society."


Fairness is the critical key to understanding the means by which the voluminous advocacies for all manner of lofty Liberating ideals; advanced through flowery Leftist vaguaries, are summarily snatched back through the much more specific cries for collective control of those things which otherwise set aside those liberties.


The discussion of any fair portion of them would require considerable space, so I'll just hit upon a couple that jumped out at me.

In just the outline of their would-be principles, we find this jewel:


"A society where all people can find jobs in a growing full-employment economy"


Oh that's down the middle American right there... ain't it? I mean that's great stuff... They're looking to secure the means for every individual to 'find jobs' in a growing, FULL EMPLOYMENT Economy...


Then in the next line; there's this:


"A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."


Oops... So in the span of one rhetorical breath, the individual is now relegated to being subservient to the GUARANTEES AFFORDED BY the LEGAL RIGHT OF THE COLLECTIVE; and considerations for those things which are required for a growing economy are simulataneously set aside; rendered secondary to the unquestionable GUARANTEES inherent in such.


Then there's this indecipherable rant:

"A society where both public and private discrimination based upon race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, religion, ethnic identity, sexual orientation, economic status, philosophical persuasion, or discrimination through lawful means."


Moving on...


Then there's this: "A society where we recognize that the strengthening of the family and the protection of children are essential to the health of the nation."


Oh THAT sounds good... What God fearin' American could be against THAT? I mean after all.. "IT'S THE CHILDREN! and the HEALTH OF OUR NATION, MAN!"


"We OPPOSE: Government interference in all matters related to the control of one’s own body, including protection of the rights of women to bear children, practice birth control and obtain safe and legal abortions..."

TALK ABOUT Double-Speak; they frame it as a position which demands the government stay OUT of their rights to murder the unborn child... when in truth; there is NO RIGHT TO MURDER one's unborn child; and what they are demanding is that the government PROVIDE THEM THE GUARANTEE TO DO SO. And after having just spoken to the necessity for a strong family being essential to a viable, sustainable nation.


Poor children... Poor Nation...



And so it goes; where they rant on about the etheral spearation of Church and State; then demand that government tax Churches... Their defense of private property and that governemnt needs to protect the land from the various usuages which may come about through the private ownership of such... and so on.


So we find that the DFL; as was previously noted; is an advocate of the Needs of the Collective superceding the rights of the Individual... OKA: Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, and any of the innumerable revisions/rationalizations inherent in Left-think... and this despite the protestations of the Ideological Left... who need you to believe that such simply does not exist; not in any form, fashion or historical relevance.

I see nothing in there about the dialectic. I see nothing in there about the labor theory of value. I see nothing in there about the dictatorship of the proletariat. Again... for you to call the DFL a COMMUNIST front group makes it perfectly clear that you don't know a fucking THING about communism. why am I not surprised?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

what bullshit. the DFL IS the name of the democratic party in Minnesota. To suggest it is a communist front group is worthy of nothing but laughter

ROFL... Ahh yes... the Flat-nosed contempt for any assertion which speaks to the indefinable notions of Leftism... That hackneyed knee-jerk, reactionary guffaw wherein the opposition chortels disgust against the charge that their closely held feelings are rooted in Collectivism...

Because after all, the Minnesota Democrats are known far and wide for their dogmatic defense of free-market Capitalism and the Individual Liberty which sustains such.

We can rest assured that the assurances from our opposition rests within her direct knowledge of the DFL... We can have NO DOUBT that she's familiar with Communism and it's tendency towards deceit and it's long history of promising Individual Freedom and returning Collective Tyranny.

So... to test that, let's take a gander at a few key elements of the Minnesota DFL 2006-2008 Platform.

The first thing that strikes me, is the cry for that critical element of Left-think; the ethereal; and all too subjective notion of "Fairness":

"At the heart of our party lies a fundamental conviction, that Americans must not only be free, but they must live in a fair society.


We believe it is the responsibility of government to help us achieve this fair society."


Fairness is the critical key to understanding the means by which the voluminous advocacies for all manner of lofty Liberating ideals; advanced through flowery Leftist vaguaries, are summarily snatched back through the much more specific cries for collective control of those things which otherwise set aside those liberties.


The discussion of any fair portion of them would require considerable space, so I'll just hit upon a couple that jumped out at me.

In just the outline of their would-be principles, we find this jewel:


"A society where all people can find jobs in a growing full-employment economy"


Oh that's down the middle American right there... ain't it? I mean that's great stuff... They're looking to secure the means for every individual to 'find jobs' in a growing, FULL EMPLOYMENT Economy...


Then in the next line; there's this:


"A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."


Oops... So in the span of one rhetorical breath, the individual is now relegated to being subservient to the GUARANTEES AFFORDED BY the LEGAL RIGHT OF THE COLLECTIVE; and considerations for those things which are required for a growing economy are simulataneously set aside; rendered secondary to the unquestionable GUARANTEES inherent in such.


Then there's this indecipherable rant:

"A society where both public and private discrimination based upon race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, religion, ethnic identity, sexual orientation, economic status, philosophical persuasion, or discrimination through lawful means."


Moving on...


Then there's this: "A society where we recognize that the strengthening of the family and the protection of children are essential to the health of the nation."


Oh THAT sounds good... What God fearin' American could be against THAT? I mean after all.. "IT'S THE CHILDREN! and the HEALTH OF OUR NATION, MAN!"


"We OPPOSE: Government interference in all matters related to the control of one’s own body, including protection of the rights of women to bear children, practice birth control and obtain safe and legal abortions..."

TALK ABOUT Double-Speak; they frame it as a position which demands the government stay OUT of their rights to murder the unborn child... when in truth; there is NO RIGHT TO MURDER one's unborn child; and what they are demanding is that the government PROVIDE THEM THE GUARANTEE TO DO SO. And after having just spoken to the necessity for a strong family being essential to a viable, sustainable nation.


Poor children... Poor Nation...



And so it goes; where they rant on about the etheral spearation of Church and State; then demand that government tax Churches... Their defense of private property and that governemnt needs to protect the land from the various usuages which may come about through the private ownership of such... and so on.


So we find that the DFL; as was previously noted; is an advocate of the Needs of the Collective superceding the rights of the Individual... OKA: Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, and any of the innumerable revisions/rationalizations inherent in Left-think... and this despite the protestations of the Ideological Left... who need you to believe that such simply does not exist; not in any form, fashion or historical relevance.

I see nothing in there about the dialectic. I see nothing in there about the labor theory of value. I see nothing in there about the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Huh... Ya don't? Well that actually discredits you as an objective observer. The fact that ya claim to see Nothing, really only speaks to what ya see, or claim to see and has no actual bearing on what there is to see.

Rest assured that I see it... It's LOADED WITH ALL OF IT. And here's the example I used which speaks directly to the Labor theory of value; and the dictatorial proletariat...

"A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."

Now that it didn't use the word Dictatorial or Proletariat; doesn't change the fact that both concepts were boldly represented.

Again... for you to call the DFL a COMMUNIST front group makes it perfectly clear that you don't know a fucking THING about communism. why am I not surprised?

Huh... I was sure I provided some evidence which conclusively established the Communist bona fides of the DFL...

Oh HERE IT IS: Post 25 . Reposted below for your edification.

Always tickled by the ignorance of the Neo-Left... (Children of the Left...)

When faced with the advocacy denying any communist kinship with Minnesota's Farm Labor Party... I was just cruising through some history of the Farm Labor Movement... and came across this lovely compilation:

FARMER-LABOR PARTY

ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORY

"The first modern Farmer-Labor Party emerged in Minnesota in 1918. ..."

1920

APRIL

“A Yankee Convention,” by Robert Minor. [April 1920] In this article from the pages of The Liberator, Communist Party leader Robert Minor expresses excitement over the growth of the cooperative movement in America, not so much for that trend’s ability to lead to the long-run liberation of the working class, but for its ability to bring together farmers and the urban working class in a common cause.

OCTOBER

"“Radicalism in Amerca,” by Morris Hillquit. [October 15, 1920] This article by Socialist Party NEC member Morris Hillquit in the party’s official organ reviews the two new political organizations to emerge in post-war America—the Labor Party (which transformed itself to the Farmer-Labor Party) and the Communist Party."


1922

MAY

"“Theses on the United Front of Labor,” a confidential document adopted by the Central Executive Committee of the Communist Party of America at its session of May 29, 1922. A fascinating glimpse from the Comintern Archives at the thinking of the governing CEC of the Communist Party with respect to its United Front strategy. The majority of the American proletariat was not conscious of its distinct class interests, the document stated, and could gain awareness—and usefulness to the revolutionary movement —only through its daily struggle over wages, working conditions, etc. ..."

And so on and so forth...

Thus establishing the subversive nature of the SOURCE used by the OP to undermine Military Readiness of US Forces.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

So it's settled then... The OP's source is a pack of subversives who's anti-American foundation renders any sense of objectivty which such a poll might otherwise hope to impart, Null and VOID.

Fair enough...

 

[bodecea]

So it's settled then... The OP's source is a pack of subversives who's anti-American foundation renders any sense of objectivty which such a poll might otherwise hope to impart, Null and VOID.

Fair enough...

Well, it's not as if we would be surprised that you have closed your eyes to modern reality or anything.

 

[maineman]

A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."[/I]

the fact that you consider unions exercising collective bargaining rights as synonymous with Marx's Labor Theory of Value further proves what a blathering moron you really are. I got no time for COMPLETE idiots. AMF

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

And here's the example I used which speaks directly to the Labor theory of value; and the dictatorial proletariat...

"A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."

the fact that you consider unions exercising collective bargaining rights as synonymous with Marx's Labor Theory of Value further proves what a blathering moron you really are. I got no time for COMPLETE idiots. AMF

Oh roger that, Commander. I hear ya...

I mean WHO could argue that Guaranteed, unquestionable rights to bargain collectively... which of course implies coercive, dictatorial powers of the proletariat... could in ANY WAY be correlated to Marxism and his theory on the Value of Labor... why that's just NUTS!

And further, that such in ANY WAY could effect the potential for a GROWING; FULL EMPLOYMENT ECONOMY... Are ya KIDDIN'?

Of course this is the third time that you've managed to completely avoid the incontestable evidence of the communist roots of the DFL which I've provided for ya TWICE...

ROFLMNAO... Oh, you're ALL OVER IT Commander... Sir...

And FTR: Your concession is duly noted; and summarily accepted. Learn your place Sis... it'll serve ya well in you future endeavors.

Love,

PI
Corporal USMC... retired.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

So it's settled then... The OP's source is a pack of subversives who's anti-American foundation renders any sense of objectivty which such a poll might otherwise hope to impart, Null and VOID.

Fair enough...

Well, it's not as if we would be surprised that you have closed your eyes to modern reality or anything.

What "modern reality' are ya speakin' of? Be specific... and as always, you're failure to specify that which your you've foolishly implied; will be your concession TO ME; that you're essentially full of Bovine Excrement...

But I'd like to wish ya the VERY BEST of luck in coming up with somethin'... ANYTHING to avoid the mathematical certainty of your looming concession.

 

[ski87]

Great, thanks for the statistics update, all great stuff, I have a statistic for you though




100% - Chance of butt stroke to the forehead for any queer that even looks at me the wrong way.

And I suppose you support the right of any female soldier to do the same to you if you look at her the wrong way without invitation?

No I dont support that right because I have a double standard. Me looking at chicks in uniform is OK, queers lookin at me get jacked, I bet you dont like that now do ya?

 

[maineman]

And here's the example I used which speaks directly to the Labor theory of value; and the dictatorial proletariat...

"A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."

the fact that you consider unions exercising collective bargaining rights as synonymous with Marx's Labor Theory of Value further proves what a blathering moron you really are. I got no time for COMPLETE idiots. AMF

Oh roger that, Commander. I hear ya...

I mean WHO could argue that Guaranteed, unquestionable rights to bargain collectively... which of course implies coercive, dictatorial powers of the proletariat... could in ANY WAY be correlated to Marxism and his theory on the Value of Labor... why that's just NUTS!

And further, that such in ANY WAY could effect the potential for a GROWING; FULL EMPLOYMENT ECONOMY... Are ya KIDDIN'?

Of course this is the third time that you've managed to completely avoid the incontestable evidence of the communist roots of the DFL which I've provided for ya TWICE...

ROFLMNAO... Oh, you're ALL OVER IT Commander... Sir...

And FTR: Your concession is duly noted; and summarily accepted. Learn your place Sis... it'll serve ya well in you future endeavors.

Love,

PI
Corporal USMC... retired.

the DFL's ROOTS are not the issue. YOur claim was that they were nothing but a "communist front" organization...that is completely bogus.

And look, pal... if you haven't read anything by Marx and don't really understand what the labor theory of value is, and how it fits into the theory of classic communism, why not just SAY so? Collective bargaining has nothing to do with the labor theory of value. nothing. Collective bargaining within a capitalistic system clearly acknowledges the power of the markets to determine the value of products brought to that market. The labor theory of value completely discards that system of valuation. Like I said, you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to communism. Trust me...it shows.

but... anyone who retired as a corporal, clearly should not be expected to know much about anything.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

the fact that you consider unions exercising collective bargaining rights as synonymous with Marx's Labor Theory of Value further proves what a blathering moron you really are. I got no time for COMPLETE idiots. AMF

Oh roger that, Commander. I hear ya...

I mean WHO could argue that Guaranteed, unquestionable rights to bargain collectively... which of course implies coercive, dictatorial powers of the proletariat... could in ANY WAY be correlated to Marxism and his theory on the Value of Labor... why that's just NUTS!

And further, that such in ANY WAY could effect the potential for a GROWING; FULL EMPLOYMENT ECONOMY... Are ya KIDDIN'?

Of course this is the third time that you've managed to completely avoid the incontestable evidence of the communist roots of the DFL which I've provided for ya TWICE...

ROFLMNAO... Oh, you're ALL OVER IT Commander... Sir...

And FTR: Your concession is duly noted; and summarily accepted. Learn your place Sis... it'll serve ya well in you future endeavors.

Love,

PI
Corporal USMC... retired.

the DFL's ROOTS are not the issue.

No? Huh... Let's take a look at the videotape?

He won the endorsement of the Minnesote Democratic Farmer labor Party (DFL), a communist front group

what bullshit. the DFL IS the name of the democratic party in Minnesota. To suggest it is a communist front group is worthy of nothing but laughter

Now was that or was that NOT YOU declaring that the DFL was in NO WAY aligned with Communism, or other such foregin anti-American notions?

Sure it was... thus refuting yet ANOTHER of your little points.

To which I responded by showing INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE that the DFL was INDISPUTABLY ROOTED IN AND FOUNDED UPON NOTHING BUT COMMUNISM and was IN FACT: A FUNCTION OF COMMUNISM...

Always tickled by the ignorance of the Neo-Left... (Children of the Left...)

When faced with the advocacy denying any communist kinship with Minnesota's Farm Labor Party... I was just cruising through some history of the Farm Labor Movement... and came across this lovely compilation:

FARMER-LABOR PARTY

ORGANIZATIONAL HISTORY

"The first modern Farmer-Labor Party emerged in Minnesota in 1918. ..."

1920

APRIL

“A Yankee Convention,” by Robert Minor. [April 1920] In this article from the pages of The Liberator, Communist Party leader Robert Minor expresses excitement over the growth of the cooperative movement in America, not so much for that trend’s ability to lead to the long-run liberation of the working class, but for its ability to bring together farmers and the urban working class in a common cause.

OCTOBER

"“Radicalism in Amerca,” by Morris Hillquit. [October 15, 1920] This article by Socialist Party NEC member Morris Hillquit in the party’s official organ reviews the two new political organizations to emerge in post-war America—the Labor Party (which transformed itself to the Farmer-Labor Party) and the Communist Party."


1922

MAY

"“Theses on the United Front of Labor,” a confidential document adopted by the Central Executive Committee of the Communist Party of America at its session of May 29, 1922. A fascinating glimpse from the Comintern Archives at the thinking of the governing CEC of the Communist Party with respect to its United Front strategy. The majority of the American proletariat was not conscious of its distinct class interests, the document stated, and could gain awareness—and usefulness to the revolutionary movement —only through its daily struggle over wages, working conditions, etc. ..."

And so on and so forth...

Which was YET MORE REFUTING evidence which you've sought thus far to COMPLETELY IGNORE; and now come to demand via this flaccid little implication... that the COMMUNIST ROOTS of an organization could have NO potential BEARING on the MODERN Policy advocacies of such a group... and this made certain through the absence of verbiage common to the communist rhetoric of their founding...

Your claim was that they were nothing but a "communist front" organization...that is completely bogus.

Oh well that's mighty powerful stuff their Commander... Now did ya learn that sort of high minded prose at University or was that something ya gleamed from all your years commandingbright young swabs?

And look, pal... if you haven't read anything by Marx and don't really understand what the labor theory of value is, and how it fits into the theory of classic communism, why not just SAY so? Collective bargaining has nothing to do with the labor theory of value. nothing. Collective bargaining within a capitalistic system clearly acknowledges the power of the markets to determine the value of products brought to that market. The labor theory of value completely discards that system of valuation. Like I said, you don't know what you are talking about when it comes to communism. Trust me...it shows.

Huh... So if the Porletariat doesn't rise up and slaughter the burgiouse... then that proletariat has no potential claim to being Communist? Meaning that where the proletariat would exist within a competing ideology; and has no means to believe that it can resort to such revolutionary means and prevail; that attempts to secure the means to unilaterally determine the value of their labor; without regard to any other consideration; that where they demand GUARANTEED, UNLIMITED RIGHTS to determine the collective value of their labor; thus demonstrating their Marixst adherence that such represents a commodity; that cannot possibly be construed to reflect Marx' theories of the value of the labor commodity...

Now ain't THAT interestin'...

but... anyone who retired as a corporal, clearly should not be expected to know much about anything.

Yeah you'd think, huh... And how sad is it, when a college educated, retired Navy Commander gets her ass handed to her by a HS drop out, who spent the best part of 4 years workin' his way up to Corporal of Marines.

My guess it that such is simply the natural result of the inherent superiority common to those who seek to challenge themselves against the highest standard...

But hey... let's not quibble over who's smarter... I mean you've so much more invested in trying to be that guy... and I'm fairly comfortable with my lowly station; and I'm perfectly comfortable with you're being my intellectual bitch remaining 'our little secret.'

 

[Gunny]

Since I don't have a "Stupid Stuff" forum, guess Conspiracy theories will do.