- Dec 31, 2011
- 1,418
- 466
- 200
Then prove the following: Democratic Socialists of America did not create the New Party
Prove to me that Obama was not a member of the New Party
Prove to me that Obama was not a member of the New Party
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Then prove the following: Democratic Socialists of America did not create the New Party
Prove to me that Obama was not a member of the New Party
so·cial·ism/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
Noun:
A political and economic theory of that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated...
(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.
Only in the delusional World of the left, could these nonsensical statements make any sense.
Only in the delusional World of the left, could these nonsensical statements make any sense.
It's your OP that makes no sense, bro. Who are the Democratic Socialists of America? What is the New Party?
Huh?
so·cial·ism/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
Noun:
A political and economic theory of that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated...
(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.
That describes the GObP/Repub party.
It also describes the Repub health care system where we all have to pay for the care of those who do not or cannot pay for themselves.
Its the opposite of ObamaCare.
Only in the delusional World of the left, could these nonsensical statements make any sense.
It's your OP that makes no sense, bro. Who are the Democratic Socialists of America? What is the New Party?
The DS of A is not some small hidden group.
Huh?
so·cial·ism/ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
Noun:
A political and economic theory of that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated...
(in Marxist theory) A transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.
That describes the GObP/Repub party.
It also describes the Repub health care system where we all have to pay for the care of those who do not or cannot pay for themselves.
Its the opposite of ObamaCare.
It's not about the way socialism works its about the outcome...
Would a heart be a heart if it pumped backwards??
At the end of the day our government redistributes wealth to those who do nothing... That is socialism or at least the end result is the end result of socialism.
If it makes you any happier I would gladly rename the government redistribution of wealth "Obamunism" and you know what?? I will also claim that new economic ideology is a synonym to socialism..
Happy?
"Obamunism"
redistribution of wealth to those that do nothing is an unfortunate bi product of the actual intent...which is to assist those that do all they can, but still struggle...
It's your OP that makes no sense, bro. Who are the Democratic Socialists of America? What is the New Party?
The DS of A is not some small hidden group.
I found it with a web search: Democratic Socialists of America
They may not be hidden, but I'd say "small" describes them pretty well. And I still don't know what the "New Party" is. Here's one reference to something by that name:
New Party (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
That outfit existed in the 1990s. And apparently it might have endorsed Obama in '96.
This is pretty damned obscure, frankly. It's hardly evidence that Obama is a socialist. Certainly not enough to counter the mountain of evidence to the contrary. And I say that as someone who would very much prefer it if he was.
redistribution of wealth to those that do nothing is an unfortunate bi product of the actual intent...which is to assist those that do all they can, but still struggle...
Redistribution of wealth to those who "do nothing" is a fact of life. It's called "aid to the poor." Very little in the way of changes to these government functions is proposed.
No, what we want is redistribution of wealth to those who work, as opposed to those who own. Different kettle of fish altogether.
Huh?
That describes the GObP/Repub party.
It also describes the Repub health care system where we all have to pay for the care of those who do not or cannot pay for themselves.
Its the opposite of ObamaCare.
It's not about the way socialism works its about the outcome...
Would a heart be a heart if it pumped backwards??
At the end of the day our government redistributes wealth to those who do nothing... That is socialism or at least the end result is the end result of socialism.
If it makes you any happier I would gladly rename the government redistribution of wealth "Obamunism" and you know what?? I will also claim that new economic ideology is a synonym to socialism..
Happy?
"Obamunism"
redistribution of wealth to those that do nothing is an unfortunate bi product of the actual intent...which is to assist those that do all they can, but still struggle...
I am not saying Obama is a socialist.
Never said it.
But Obama does believe in many ideas that are of the socialist ideology.
redistribution of wealth to those that do nothing is an unfortunate bi product of the actual intent...which is to assist those that do all they can, but still struggle...
Redistribution of wealth to those who "do nothing" is a fact of life. It's called "aid to the poor." Very little in the way of changes to these government functions is proposed.
No, what we want is redistribution of wealth to those who work, as opposed to those who own. Different kettle of fish altogether.
you are wrong.
Redistribution of wealth to those that do nothing is NOT "aid to the poor"
The poor are not comprised of only those that do nothing.
Many of "the poor" bust their asses...but get nowhere.
You may have not meant it as it came across...but if you did, I very much resent what you said.
Those that do nothing disguise themselves as those that bust their asses but still are poor...and that is why they get their entitlenmts...
But it is not designed to assist those that dont try...that is just a bi product of the welfare and unemployment systems....
redistribution of wealth to those that do nothing is an unfortunate bi product of the actual intent...which is to assist those that do all they can, but still struggle...
Redistribution of wealth to those who "do nothing" is a fact of life. It's called "aid to the poor." Very little in the way of changes to these government functions is proposed.
No, what we want is redistribution of wealth to those who work, as opposed to those who own. Different kettle of fish altogether.
you are wrong.
Redistribution of wealth to those that do nothing is NOT "aid to the poor"
The poor are not comprised of only those that do nothing.
Many of "the poor" bust their asses...but get nowhere.
You may have not meant it as it came across...but if you did, I very much resent what you said.
Those that do nothing disguise themselves as those that bust their asses but still are poor...and that is why they get their entitlenmts...
But it is not designed to assist those that dont try...that is just a bi product of the welfare and unemployment systems....