None of you are rich. Why are you defending billionaires?

[Vanquish]

Really? How would you label a person who believes big government/central planning, ownership of wealth, high taxes, socialized medicine, deficit spending with no earthly way to repay debt, no respect or interest in the private sector, high energy costs, larger and more social spending programs, etc?.....Obama is all of these things. Yes, perfect examples of a freedom and liberty loving patriotic American.
Please. Obama is a fucking Bolshevik. It is his desire to see as many people dependent on government as possible.
Now,,try asking a legitimate question ....or fuck off. I have no time for bullshit childish games.

Then why is every one of your whackjob posts full of insane shit that you can't backup?

1. Every government in the world involves central planning. Find one (in the top 100 countries that is) that doesn't and I'll buy you a lollipop. You can't. But you won't admit it.

2. Not only that, but our country has ALWAYS placed restrictions on imports and exports since the beginning of the whole country. Denying that would make you look idiotic.

3. Obama has NEVER supported taking away private property or forced work on anyone.

4. Obama has NEVER attempted to take over the means of production of the GDP. Even the auto bailout that involved the US government merely had the government in an INVESTMENT role. Not day to day operations. Today we don't own the car company either.

Fucking get a life you worthless pile of excrement. You don't know the meaning of socialist (as proven by your supposed examples) and you should have all access to the internet revoked...as it's making you even MORE stupid.

Yeah yeah yeah....You obviously have a different view of what Central Planning is other than the true definition. Central planning is where government maintains total control of economy, movement of the people in and out of country as well as inside country. Controls all industry all banking all communication and media. central planning is a virtual totalitarian regime. Venezuela's government is an example of Central Planning.
I never stated our government has no restrictions/rules on import and export. If you can find where I stated or implied that, you can have the lollipop you owe me,back.
BTW..NEVER start a sentence with "not only that"....That phrase is used in continuance of an idea. Please.
I never stated Obama was going to take away property or force work on anyone. Again. You are making up things as you go along.
Obama is not a proponent or a friend to the private sector. He believes the answers to poor economy and other factors is larger government and more government employment. He is a proponent of bureaucracy. He thinks job creation's highest and best use is in the public sector. That's a fact. You need only look to see where most of the stimulus money went.
It is well documented that the GM and Chrysler bailouts were payback to the UAW for their support in the 2008 election.
Fact, Chrysler is no longer technically an American company. It is owned at least in part by Fiat of Italy.
GM ended up declaring bankruptcy anyway and now the UAW owns the company. The reason why John and Jane Q Taxpayer are no longer owners of GM is because GM has never been and never will be obligated to pay back the bailout money.
As far as I am concerned none of these companies including Goldman Sachs and the other investment firms should have been able to declare bankruptcy, restructure and start anew.
But no....The politicians saw their gravy train of DNC and RNC money going down the dark path and no way could they have that.
Now as far as your parting shot....Why? Becaube I have the nerve to have a differing opinion than you?
Are my set of facts less worthy because they do not tow the Liberal line?
This is typical of you libs. You are intolerant to the core.
I am taking the high road and not return the insult.
I could rip you a new asshole, but I reserve my best stuff for worthy opponents. You are easy. Have a nice day. Done.

Yeah. You are done. I sat your ass down on a spike in my post above.

Here's the funniest part of your post...not that you'll "get the joke":

This is typical of you libs. You are intolerant to the core.

You scream intolerance of others while being intolerant. Making a sweeping, unsubstantiated mischaracterization of a large group of people.

Not only that, but you can't fucking read. I'm not a liberal. Your continuous attempts to keep painting me as one make you look like you haven't passed 1st grade reading comprehension.

Yeah, I used "not only that" because the continual point I'm making is that you're a complete fucking moron/partisan shill who is insulated from reality. You're the type of person that spews his load all over the pages of USMB, anesthetized by their own self-importance. You're in this stupor of "libs r so evul. I must protekt the kuntree with my posts" that you dont try to have a real conversation with people.

Here's a tip...I can tell that you're a real shill because you're a bad listener AND you won't try to reach common ground in a conversation. No you won't be giving up your values if you try to understand someone with an opposing viewpoint...or find a basis for agreement with one.

Oh wait. I'm sure you'll call being reasonable some hippie liberal bullshit.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It is well documented that the GM and Chrysler bailouts were payback to the UAW for their support in the 2008 election.
Fact, Chrysler is no longer technically an American company. It is owned at least in part by Fiat of Italy.
GM ended up declaring bankruptcy anyway and now the UAW owns the company.

Yeah....that was the.....

....end-result.

Do you "conservatives" EVER get tired o' being WRONG?

Just because you use BIG FONT does not make your insignificant post more meaningful.
In fact it intensifies the inaccuracy of them.

In other words, ya' got.....

NOTHIN'!!!!!

(Whatta shocker.)

 

[thereisnospoon]

Then why is every one of your whackjob posts full of insane shit that you can't backup?

1. Every government in the world involves central planning. Find one (in the top 100 countries that is) that doesn't and I'll buy you a lollipop. You can't. But you won't admit it.

2. Not only that, but our country has ALWAYS placed restrictions on imports and exports since the beginning of the whole country. Denying that would make you look idiotic.

3. Obama has NEVER supported taking away private property or forced work on anyone.

4. Obama has NEVER attempted to take over the means of production of the GDP. Even the auto bailout that involved the US government merely had the government in an INVESTMENT role. Not day to day operations. Today we don't own the car company either.

Fucking get a life you worthless pile of excrement. You don't know the meaning of socialist (as proven by your supposed examples) and you should have all access to the internet revoked...as it's making you even MORE stupid.

Yeah yeah yeah....You obviously have a different view of what Central Planning is other than the true definition. Central planning is where government maintains total control of economy, movement of the people in and out of country as well as inside country. Controls all industry all banking all communication and media. central planning is a virtual totalitarian regime. Venezuela's government is an example of Central Planning.
I never stated our government has no restrictions/rules on import and export. If you can find where I stated or implied that, you can have the lollipop you owe me,back.
BTW..NEVER start a sentence with "not only that"....That phrase is used in continuance of an idea. Please.
I never stated Obama was going to take away property or force work on anyone. Again. You are making up things as you go along.
Obama is not a proponent or a friend to the private sector. He believes the answers to poor economy and other factors is larger government and more government employment. He is a proponent of bureaucracy. He thinks job creation's highest and best use is in the public sector. That's a fact. You need only look to see where most of the stimulus money went.
It is well documented that the GM and Chrysler bailouts were payback to the UAW for their support in the 2008 election.
Fact, Chrysler is no longer technically an American company. It is owned at least in part by Fiat of Italy.
GM ended up declaring bankruptcy anyway and now the UAW owns the company. The reason why John and Jane Q Taxpayer are no longer owners of GM is because GM has never been and never will be obligated to pay back the bailout money.
As far as I am concerned none of these companies including Goldman Sachs and the other investment firms should have been able to declare bankruptcy, restructure and start anew.
But no....The politicians saw their gravy train of DNC and RNC money going down the dark path and no way could they have that.
Now as far as your parting shot....Why? Becaube I have the nerve to have a differing opinion than you?
Are my set of facts less worthy because they do not tow the Liberal line?
This is typical of you libs. You are intolerant to the core.
I am taking the high road and not return the insult.
I could rip you a new asshole, but I reserve my best stuff for worthy opponents. You are easy. Have a nice day. Done.

Yeah. You are done. I sat your ass down on a spike in my post above.

Here's the funniest part of your post...not that you'll "get the joke":

This is typical of you libs. You are intolerant to the core.

You scream intolerance of others while being intolerant. Making a sweeping, unsubstantiated mischaracterization of a large group of people.

Not only that, but you can't fucking read. I'm not a liberal. Your continuous attempts to keep painting me as one make you look like you haven't passed 1st grade reading comprehension.

Yeah, I used "not only that" because the continual point I'm making is that you're a complete fucking moron/partisan shill who is insulated from reality. You're the type of person that spews his load all over the pages of USMB, anesthetized by their own self-importance. You're in this stupor of "libs r so evul. I must protekt the kuntree with my posts" that you dont try to have a real conversation with people.

Here's a tip...I can tell that you're a real shill because you're a bad listener AND you won't try to reach common ground in a conversation. No you won't be giving up your values if you try to understand someone with an opposing viewpoint...or find a basis for agreement with one.

Oh wait. I'm sure you'll call being reasonable some hippie liberal bullshit.

No.When you end your post to me with "Fucking get a life you worthless pile of excrement."...That is intolerance.
Your posts have no basis in fact. You responded for the sole purpose of cursing at me.
And I'm intolerant...Face palm.
Oh I really enjoy reading this...." you're a bad listener AND you won't try to reach common ground in a conversation. ".....Really...All that says is I refuse to see things your way. Based on that you spew insults.
How can I listen to a written word?
I posted several facts in response to your post. Your counterpoint was a bunch of nonsense followed up with colorful metaphors questioning my IQ....
Then to make yourself feel better you claim some sort of "victory"....Please.
The only thing that wins out here is facts.
You go ahead keep those insults and colorful metaphors coming. Goes to credibility. Or in your case, lack thereof.
Ok, your turn...... To flip out.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yeah....that was the.....

Do you "conservatives" EVER get tired o' being WRONG?

Just because you use BIG FONT does not make your insignificant post more meaningful.
In fact it intensifies the inaccuracy of them.

In other words, ya' got.....

NOTHIN'!!!!!

(Whatta shocker.)

Hey biker boy...You got that seat angled upward so it crams up your ass?
FUCK YOU RIGHT BACK....You empty headed licker of other people's anal pores.
You're on the porch with the little dogs....

 

[Vanquish]

Yeah yeah yeah....You obviously have a different view of what Central Planning is other than the true definition. Central planning is where government maintains total control of economy, movement of the people in and out of country as well as inside country. Controls all industry all banking all communication and media. central planning is a virtual totalitarian regime. Venezuela's government is an example of Central Planning.
I never stated our government has no restrictions/rules on import and export. If you can find where I stated or implied that, you can have the lollipop you owe me,back.
BTW..NEVER start a sentence with "not only that"....That phrase is used in continuance of an idea. Please.
I never stated Obama was going to take away property or force work on anyone. Again. You are making up things as you go along.
Obama is not a proponent or a friend to the private sector. He believes the answers to poor economy and other factors is larger government and more government employment. He is a proponent of bureaucracy. He thinks job creation's highest and best use is in the public sector. That's a fact. You need only look to see where most of the stimulus money went.
It is well documented that the GM and Chrysler bailouts were payback to the UAW for their support in the 2008 election.
Fact, Chrysler is no longer technically an American company. It is owned at least in part by Fiat of Italy.
GM ended up declaring bankruptcy anyway and now the UAW owns the company. The reason why John and Jane Q Taxpayer are no longer owners of GM is because GM has never been and never will be obligated to pay back the bailout money.
As far as I am concerned none of these companies including Goldman Sachs and the other investment firms should have been able to declare bankruptcy, restructure and start anew.
But no....The politicians saw their gravy train of DNC and RNC money going down the dark path and no way could they have that.
Now as far as your parting shot....Why? Becaube I have the nerve to have a differing opinion than you?
Are my set of facts less worthy because they do not tow the Liberal line?
This is typical of you libs. You are intolerant to the core.
I am taking the high road and not return the insult.
I could rip you a new asshole, but I reserve my best stuff for worthy opponents. You are easy. Have a nice day. Done.

Yeah. You are done. I sat your ass down on a spike in my post above.

Here's the funniest part of your post...not that you'll "get the joke":

This is typical of you libs. You are intolerant to the core.

You scream intolerance of others while being intolerant. Making a sweeping, unsubstantiated mischaracterization of a large group of people.

Not only that, but you can't fucking read. I'm not a liberal. Your continuous attempts to keep painting me as one make you look like you haven't passed 1st grade reading comprehension.

Yeah, I used "not only that" because the continual point I'm making is that you're a complete fucking moron/partisan shill who is insulated from reality. You're the type of person that spews his load all over the pages of USMB, anesthetized by their own self-importance. You're in this stupor of "libs r so evul. I must protekt the kuntree with my posts" that you dont try to have a real conversation with people.

Here's a tip...I can tell that you're a real shill because you're a bad listener AND you won't try to reach common ground in a conversation. No you won't be giving up your values if you try to understand someone with an opposing viewpoint...or find a basis for agreement with one.

Oh wait. I'm sure you'll call being reasonable some hippie liberal bullshit.

No.When you end your post to me with "Fucking get a life you worthless pile of excrement."...That is intolerance.
Your posts have no basis in fact. You responded for the sole purpose of cursing at me.
And I'm intolerant...Face palm.
Oh I really enjoy reading this...." you're a bad listener AND you won't try to reach common ground in a conversation. ".....Really...All that says is I refuse to see things your way. Based on that you spew insults.
How can I listen to a written word?
I posted several facts in response to your post. Your counterpoint was a bunch of nonsense followed up with colorful metaphors questioning my IQ....
Then to make yourself feel better you claim some sort of "victory"....Please.
The only thing that wins out here is facts.
You go ahead keep those insults and colorful metaphors coming. Goes to credibility. Or in your case, lack thereof.
Ok, your turn...... To flip out.

Riiiiight. You claimed Obama was a socialist. So I went through EXACTLY what socialism REALLY means...instead of your cockamaimy bullshit idea of what you've been told it means.

One of those was the revocation of personal property. You whined "waaaaa I never said he tried to do that waaaaaaa" Uhm yes you did. When you called him a socialist. Either mean what you say or shut the fuck up.

Yeah, I was intolerant...after you pissed me the fuck off with your intolerance. Timing's a bitch isn't it? I give people the chance to be nice and honest and decent. Then they fail and that pisses me off.

Douchebag...written words are secondary to the spoken word. They're a substitute for the spoken word. You can "listen to what I have to say" even when it's written. Which you won't do. You continually fail to be reasonable at all. That's cool. You're part of 99% of USMB that acts that way.

One of the differences between the two of us is that I'm not a partisan shill, while you are. You'll never be able to interpret facts in an unbiased way...making your posts worthless. Oh well. Stay in your dream world where Obama is the evil devil of all that is unholy.

 

[MikeK]

This is extracted from a different thread and it should really piss off quite a few here:


In the interest of preserving the strength and social integrity of the American Nation I propose that in addition to an equitably progressive tax rate a limit of $20,000,000 (twenty-million dollars) be imposed on all personal assets and that any assets in excess of that amount be confiscated by the Internal Revenue Service. This would ensure the continued ability to acquire and retain reasonable personal wealth while eliminating the harmful potential of excessive wealth and the emergence of a financial aristocracy which could operate to undermine the nature of our democratic republic.

In addition to the above, I propose that laws be enacted to finance all federal and state elections with public money and that no candidate or elected official be permitted to accept any form of contribution or gift, whether money or anything of value, from any constituent, political supporter or other person or entity. The only exception being acceptance of ordinary and unexceptional gifts from relatives or close personal friends. Any violation of this proscription shall be subject to severe criminal penalties.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yeah. You are done. I sat your ass down on a spike in my post above.

Here's the funniest part of your post...not that you'll "get the joke":

You scream intolerance of others while being intolerant. Making a sweeping, unsubstantiated mischaracterization of a large group of people.

Not only that, but you can't fucking read. I'm not a liberal. Your continuous attempts to keep painting me as one make you look like you haven't passed 1st grade reading comprehension.

Yeah, I used "not only that" because the continual point I'm making is that you're a complete fucking moron/partisan shill who is insulated from reality. You're the type of person that spews his load all over the pages of USMB, anesthetized by their own self-importance. You're in this stupor of "libs r so evul. I must protekt the kuntree with my posts" that you dont try to have a real conversation with people.

Here's a tip...I can tell that you're a real shill because you're a bad listener AND you won't try to reach common ground in a conversation. No you won't be giving up your values if you try to understand someone with an opposing viewpoint...or find a basis for agreement with one.

Oh wait. I'm sure you'll call being reasonable some hippie liberal bullshit.

No.When you end your post to me with "Fucking get a life you worthless pile of excrement."...That is intolerance.
Your posts have no basis in fact. You responded for the sole purpose of cursing at me.
And I'm intolerant...Face palm.
Oh I really enjoy reading this...." you're a bad listener AND you won't try to reach common ground in a conversation. ".....Really...All that says is I refuse to see things your way. Based on that you spew insults.
How can I listen to a written word?
I posted several facts in response to your post. Your counterpoint was a bunch of nonsense followed up with colorful metaphors questioning my IQ....
Then to make yourself feel better you claim some sort of "victory"....Please.
The only thing that wins out here is facts.
You go ahead keep those insults and colorful metaphors coming. Goes to credibility. Or in your case, lack thereof.
Ok, your turn...... To flip out.

Riiiiight. You claimed Obama was a socialist. So I went through EXACTLY what socialism REALLY means...instead of your cockamaimy bullshit idea of what you've been told it means.

One of those was the revocation of personal property. You whined "waaaaa I never said he tried to do that waaaaaaa" Uhm yes you did. When you called him a socialist. Either mean what you say or shut the fuck up.

Yeah, I was intolerant...after you pissed me the fuck off with your intolerance. Timing's a bitch isn't it? I give people the chance to be nice and honest and decent. Then they fail and that pisses me off.

Douchebag...written words are secondary to the spoken word. They're a substitute for the spoken word. You can "listen to what I have to say" even when it's written. Which you won't do. You continually fail to be reasonable at all. That's cool. You're part of 99% of USMB that acts that way.

One of the differences between the two of us is that I'm not a partisan shill, while you are. You'll never be able to interpret facts in an unbiased way...making your posts worthless. Oh well. Stay in your dream world where Obama is the evil devil of all that is unholy.

First you're not intolerant. Now you are. Tough shit if I "pissed you off"...Pity the person who is pissed off by the facts which are not on their side.
What facts did you post? You merely posted counter opinions to the facts.
I never stated not implied anything about relating to "confiscation of property" You stated that.
Obama IS a socialist. He views capitalism as unfair. He opposes the system. He rails on about "wealthy" "Corporate Jets" "tax loopholes" "Fair share" "rich"...These are simply buzz words created to gin up support for his struggle against the producers. He is trying to get votes. Period. Obama says he is a supporter of the middle class. Yet he has done nothing to improve conditions for them. In fact with his health care law, he has made those conditions worse.
Obama believes in big government. Benevolent government. All encompassing government.
Don't tell me he is not socialist. That would be untrue. Obama has freely admitted he supports "single payer" health insurance. That is socialized medicine! But ok, according to you, he's not socialist...
You refer to me as partisan shill. Hello, pot? This is kettle. You're black.
Shut the fuck up....
Reasonable? The only thing you Liberals believe to be reasonable is if everyone agrees with you. Disagreement with one of you intolerant individuals results in the same rants you've delivered here in this thread.
Not only are you a liberal. You are an angry and irrational liberal. Only an irrational and emotional( non thinking) person uses such language to express themselves.
Perhaps you should ask me if I care whether or not you're pissed off....I will give you my response....No....In fact this has been fun for me. I hit the nerve I intended to hit. Got you all lathered up...

 

[xcelerate]

so·cial·ism

noun /ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/ 

A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole

Policy or practice based on this theory

(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism

 

[thereisnospoon]

This is extracted from a different thread and it should really piss off quite a few here:


In the interest of preserving the strength and social integrity of the American Nation I propose that in addition to an equitably progressive tax rate a limit of $20,000,000 (twenty-million dollars) be imposed on all personal assets and that any assets in excess of that amount be confiscated by the Internal Revenue Service. This would ensure the continued ability to acquire and retain reasonable personal wealth while eliminating the harmful potential of excessive wealth and the emergence of a financial aristocracy which could operate to undermine the nature of our democratic republic.

In addition to the above, I propose that laws be enacted to finance all federal and state elections with public money and that no candidate or elected official be permitted to accept any form of contribution or gift, whether money or anything of value, from any constituent, political supporter or other person or entity. The only exception being acceptance of ordinary and unexceptional gifts from relatives or close personal friends. Any violation of this proscription shall be subject to severe criminal penalties.

You'd have to see some radical changes to the US Constitution.
Otherwise I would state categorically that you are in a parallel universe.
Confiscation?....This is precisely why the people founded this nation left England in the first place. To escape an authoritarian monarchy.
BTW without abolition of the 2nd Amendment and the confiscation ( would have to be by force) of all weapons, you're proposal goes nowhere.
Nice dream for you ,I guess.

 

[xcelerate]

This is extracted from a different thread and it should really piss off quite a few here:


In the interest of preserving the strength and social integrity of the American Nation I propose that in addition to an equitably progressive tax rate a limit of $20,000,000 (twenty-million dollars) be imposed on all personal assets and that any assets in excess of that amount be confiscated by the Internal Revenue Service. This would ensure the continued ability to acquire and retain reasonable personal wealth while eliminating the harmful potential of excessive wealth and the emergence of a financial aristocracy which could operate to undermine the nature of our democratic republic.

In addition to the above, I propose that laws be enacted to finance all federal and state elections with public money and that no candidate or elected official be permitted to accept any form of contribution or gift, whether money or anything of value, from any constituent, political supporter or other person or entity. The only exception being acceptance of ordinary and unexceptional gifts from relatives or close personal friends. Any violation of this proscription shall be subject to severe criminal penalties.

You'd have to see some radical changes to the US Constitution.
Otherwise I would state categorically that you are in a parallel universe.
Confiscation?....This is precisely why the people founded this nation left England in the first place. To escape an authoritarian monarchy.
BTW without abolition of the 2nd Amendment and the confiscation ( would have to be by force) of all weapons, you're proposal goes nowhere.
Nice dream for you ,I guess.

That actually IS socialism btw and the reason why the USSR doesn't exist anymore.

 

[Dr Grump]

This is extracted from a different thread and it should really piss off quite a few here:


In the interest of preserving the strength and social integrity of the American Nation I propose that in addition to an equitably progressive tax rate a limit of $20,000,000 (twenty-million dollars) be imposed on all personal assets and that any assets in excess of that amount be confiscated by the Internal Revenue Service. This would ensure the continued ability to acquire and retain reasonable personal wealth while eliminating the harmful potential of excessive wealth and the emergence of a financial aristocracy which could operate to undermine the nature of our democratic republic.

In addition to the above, I propose that laws be enacted to finance all federal and state elections with public money and that no candidate or elected official be permitted to accept any form of contribution or gift, whether money or anything of value, from any constituent, political supporter or other person or entity. The only exception being acceptance of ordinary and unexceptional gifts from relatives or close personal friends. Any violation of this proscription shall be subject to severe criminal penalties.

You'd have to see some radical changes to the US Constitution.
Otherwise I would state categorically that you are in a parallel universe.
Confiscation?....This is precisely why the people founded this nation left England in the first place. To escape an authoritarian monarchy.
BTW without abolition of the 2nd Amendment and the confiscation ( would have to be by force) of all weapons, you're proposal goes nowhere.
Nice dream for you ,I guess.

At the end of the day you are accusing Obama of being a socialist, when he is far from so.

You don't get to define words, Websters, Collins and Oxford do..

You might not like is policies, and you might want to line those policies up like ducks in a row and pull them apart. That is fine. But don't call it socialism. It is not.

Go live in China or North Korea...then we'll talk about 'socialism"...Hell, even Greece for that matter....

You do yourself, and those that think like you, no favours when you describe something that is clearly not socialism, as socialism...

 

[Mr.Nick]

This is extracted from a different thread and it should really piss off quite a few here:


In the interest of preserving the strength and social integrity of the American Nation I propose that in addition to an equitably progressive tax rate a limit of $20,000,000 (twenty-million dollars) be imposed on all personal assets and that any assets in excess of that amount be confiscated by the Internal Revenue Service. This would ensure the continued ability to acquire and retain reasonable personal wealth while eliminating the harmful potential of excessive wealth and the emergence of a financial aristocracy which could operate to undermine the nature of our democratic republic.

In addition to the above, I propose that laws be enacted to finance all federal and state elections with public money and that no candidate or elected official be permitted to accept any form of contribution or gift, whether money or anything of value, from any constituent, political supporter or other person or entity. The only exception being acceptance of ordinary and unexceptional gifts from relatives or close personal friends. Any violation of this proscription shall be subject to severe criminal penalties.

You'd have to see some radical changes to the US Constitution.
Otherwise I would state categorically that you are in a parallel universe.
Confiscation?....This is precisely why the people founded this nation left England in the first place. To escape an authoritarian monarchy.
BTW without abolition of the 2nd Amendment and the confiscation ( would have to be by force) of all weapons, you're proposal goes nowhere.
Nice dream for you ,I guess.

At the end of the day you are accusing Obama of being a socialist, when he is far from so.

You don't get to define words, Websters, Collins and Oxford do..

You might not like is policies, and you might want to line those policies up like ducks in a row and pull them apart. That is fine. But don't call it socialism. It is not.

Go live in China or North Korea...then we'll talk about 'socialism"...Hell, even Greece for that matter....

You do yourself, and those that think like you, no favours when you describe something that is clearly not socialism, as socialism...

And what evidence do you present that refutes your claim his is NOT a socialist other than your meaningless word??

I can prove he is a socialist and you cannot prove he isn't..

He is certainly without question a socialist....

Capitalism is his fucking problem - that and a bunch of congress critters...

That stupid motherfucker fails because he actually believed "if only the world worked my way" well guess what - it doesn't....

I'm sick of the "think how i was taught to think" ironic progressives walking up in here and having the audacity to have an opinion on anything....

You all think the same - how is that??

You do as you're told.

Now shut the fuck up....

 

[bripat9643]

At the end of the day you are accusing Obama of being a socialist, when he is far from so.

You don't get to define words, Websters, Collins and Oxford do..

You might not like is policies, and you might want to line those policies up like ducks in a row and pull them apart. That is fine. But don't call it socialism. It is not.

Go live in China or North Korea...then we'll talk about 'socialism"...Hell, even Greece for that matter....

You do yourself, and those that think like you, no favours when you describe something that is clearly not socialism, as socialism...

So, in 1914 Lenin and Trotsky weren't socialists, but in 1920 they were?

 

[xcelerate]

so·cial·ism

noun /ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/ 

A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole

Policy or practice based on this theory

(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism

Just read the definition and figure it out.
It basically means that the public, all of the public get to decide how businesses run. Which is incredibly stupid btw. I wouldn't call Obama an socialist YET. With the whole spreading the wealth around idea he's closer to communism. He just wants the government to run the show, but that's democrats for you. Big government and weak people.

 

[thereisnospoon]

This is extracted from a different thread and it should really piss off quite a few here:


In the interest of preserving the strength and social integrity of the American Nation I propose that in addition to an equitably progressive tax rate a limit of $20,000,000 (twenty-million dollars) be imposed on all personal assets and that any assets in excess of that amount be confiscated by the Internal Revenue Service. This would ensure the continued ability to acquire and retain reasonable personal wealth while eliminating the harmful potential of excessive wealth and the emergence of a financial aristocracy which could operate to undermine the nature of our democratic republic.

In addition to the above, I propose that laws be enacted to finance all federal and state elections with public money and that no candidate or elected official be permitted to accept any form of contribution or gift, whether money or anything of value, from any constituent, political supporter or other person or entity. The only exception being acceptance of ordinary and unexceptional gifts from relatives or close personal friends. Any violation of this proscription shall be subject to severe criminal penalties.

You'd have to see some radical changes to the US Constitution.
Otherwise I would state categorically that you are in a parallel universe.
Confiscation?....This is precisely why the people founded this nation left England in the first place. To escape an authoritarian monarchy.
BTW without abolition of the 2nd Amendment and the confiscation ( would have to be by force) of all weapons, you're proposal goes nowhere.
Nice dream for you ,I guess.

At the end of the day you are accusing Obama of being a socialist, when he is far from so.

You don't get to define words, Websters, Collins and Oxford do..

You might not like is policies, and you might want to line those policies up like ducks in a row and pull them apart. That is fine. But don't call it socialism. It is not.

Go live in China or North Korea...then we'll talk about 'socialism"...Hell, even Greece for that matter....

You do yourself, and those that think like you, no favours when you describe something that is clearly not socialism, as socialism...

The dictionary and the ideological definitions are different. Intelligent people know this.
Obama loves China He even said he was so impressed by what government can do if permitted to do so by copying China's road and transit systems.
HUH?
In any event...let's say for a moment Obama's policies do not quite fit the precise dictionary definition of socialism...So what? The issue here is Obama's belief that the Central government is the answer to everything. He has stated he supports single payer health insurance. Has hired 70 or un elected and accountable to only to him, "Czars"....He has unilaterally ordered the shut down of a legal and legitimate business( oil drilling in the Gulf). Has assisted in passing a law which requires consumers to buy something from the federal government that they may not want( Health insurance) Has threatened the entire coal industry with bankruptcy, has tried and failed to nationalize large banking institutions. Briefly nationalized the largest auto maker in the world....Ok so that's not the precise definition of socialism....So what... Obama's policies are still bad for the country and that is why his disapproval rating is approaching 60%.

 

[yidnar]

Class Warfare!!!!!

Class Warfare started before Republicans apologized to BP.

It started before the Bush Tax cuts for billionaires.

It started before business and the Chamber of Commerce began giving to Republicans 9 to 1 over Democrats.

It began before Republicans created subsidies for oil companies.

Class Warfare began before medical bills became the number one cause of bankruptcy.

It was before corporations, with Republican help, moved millions of jobs to China.

It was before Republicans practiced voter suppression in Midwestern state.

I think it's been around for awhile.

I inherited my billions from the slave trade my ancestor's dealt in !!

 

[Mr.Nick]

At the end of the day you are accusing Obama of being a socialist, when he is far from so.

You don't get to define words, Websters, Collins and Oxford do..

You might not like is policies, and you might want to line those policies up like ducks in a row and pull them apart. That is fine. But don't call it socialism. It is not.

Go live in China or North Korea...then we'll talk about 'socialism"...Hell, even Greece for that matter....

You do yourself, and those that think like you, no favours when you describe something that is clearly not socialism, as socialism...

So, in 1914 Lenin and Trotsky weren't socialists, but in 1920 they were?

Don't even try to teach a progressive about Marxism...

Their intellect is only 1960 and some 1970...

They're the dumbest motherfuckers on the planet...

These asshats made up their mind before they could bust a nut and they will stick with it until they're dead...

They're militant psychopaths or fraudulent intellectuals.....

 

[Vanquish]

No.When you end your post to me with "Fucking get a life you worthless pile of excrement."...That is intolerance.
Your posts have no basis in fact. You responded for the sole purpose of cursing at me.
And I'm intolerant...Face palm.
Oh I really enjoy reading this...." you're a bad listener AND you won't try to reach common ground in a conversation. ".....Really...All that says is I refuse to see things your way. Based on that you spew insults.
How can I listen to a written word?
I posted several facts in response to your post. Your counterpoint was a bunch of nonsense followed up with colorful metaphors questioning my IQ....
Then to make yourself feel better you claim some sort of "victory"....Please.
The only thing that wins out here is facts.
You go ahead keep those insults and colorful metaphors coming. Goes to credibility. Or in your case, lack thereof.
Ok, your turn...... To flip out.

Riiiiight. You claimed Obama was a socialist. So I went through EXACTLY what socialism REALLY means...instead of your cockamaimy bullshit idea of what you've been told it means.

One of those was the revocation of personal property. You whined "waaaaa I never said he tried to do that waaaaaaa" Uhm yes you did. When you called him a socialist. Either mean what you say or shut the fuck up.

Yeah, I was intolerant...after you pissed me the fuck off with your intolerance. Timing's a bitch isn't it? I give people the chance to be nice and honest and decent. Then they fail and that pisses me off.

Douchebag...written words are secondary to the spoken word. They're a substitute for the spoken word. You can "listen to what I have to say" even when it's written. Which you won't do. You continually fail to be reasonable at all. That's cool. You're part of 99% of USMB that acts that way.

One of the differences between the two of us is that I'm not a partisan shill, while you are. You'll never be able to interpret facts in an unbiased way...making your posts worthless. Oh well. Stay in your dream world where Obama is the evil devil of all that is unholy.

First you're not intolerant. Now you are. Tough shit if I "pissed you off"...Pity the person who is pissed off by the facts which are not on their side.
What facts did you post? You merely posted counter opinions to the facts.
I never stated not implied anything about relating to "confiscation of property" You stated that.
Obama IS a socialist. He views capitalism as unfair. He opposes the system. He rails on about "wealthy" "Corporate Jets" "tax loopholes" "Fair share" "rich"...These are simply buzz words created to gin up support for his struggle against the producers. He is trying to get votes. Period. Obama says he is a supporter of the middle class. Yet he has done nothing to improve conditions for them. In fact with his health care law, he has made those conditions worse.
Obama believes in big government. Benevolent government. All encompassing government.
Don't tell me he is not socialist. That would be untrue. Obama has freely admitted he supports "single payer" health insurance. That is socialized medicine! But ok, according to you, he's not socialist...
You refer to me as partisan shill. Hello, pot? This is kettle. You're black.
Shut the fuck up....
Reasonable? The only thing you Liberals believe to be reasonable is if everyone agrees with you. Disagreement with one of you intolerant individuals results in the same rants you've delivered here in this thread.
Not only are you a liberal. You are an angry and irrational liberal. Only an irrational and emotional( non thinking) person uses such language to express themselves.
Perhaps you should ask me if I care whether or not you're pissed off....I will give you my response....No....In fact this has been fun for me. I hit the nerve I intended to hit. Got you all lathered up...

There you go again. You're totally insane at this point.

I'm not a liberal.

You called him socialist...that requires the confiscation of property. You keep trying to avoid that.

Look man. You keep trying to paint me into something I'm not.
I keep trying to bring things back to the actual issues. You don't.

Have fun being an unreasonable whacko, not interested in having a decent conversation. Keep repeating the same stuff you have kept repeating in the last 9000 posts about how Im this or that.

None of you can prove he's socialist. But yet you keep using the word.
At least someone has begun the correct method of defining something before you compare it in order to make a conclusion.

Ok so that's not the precise definition of socialism....So what... Obama's policies are still bad for the country and that is why his disapproval rating is approaching 60%.

At least you're finally admitting that he's not socialist now. That's some personal growth there.

 

[Mr.Nick]

I'm going to ignore the first progressive that has the audacity of challenging my ideas just out of spite and that I know the idea in which you're propagating.

So say a fucking word and you're never be allowed to talk to me again.

 

[francoHFW]

"A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole

Policy or practice based on this theory

(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism

REGULATED- thus the definition is every gov't in the world it's so general. ANYWAY, since World War II, socialism is always democratic, communism is is never democratic and always put in by violent revolutions.