Socialism More Popular Than Tea Party

[QUENTIN]

A new, wide-ranging Washington Post-ABC News poll reveals that 35 percent of respondents had a favorable view of the Tea Party, compared to 36 percent that have a favorable view of socialism. Fifty-two percent of Americans now hold unfavorable views of the Tea Party, which is an all-time high.

The telephone poll was conducted Jan. 13-16 with a random national sample of 1,053 adults, including users of both conventional and cellular telephones. The poll's margin of error is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Socialism More Popular Than Tea Party

Poll shows high marks for Obama on Tucson, low regard for political dialogue

 

[Oddball]

Well, at least the socialists are finally coming out of the closet and owning up to it.

So, we got that going for us.

 

[cutter]

The TEA PARTY needs to put a great big target complete with cross hairs on socialism.

 

[California Girl]

Well, at least the socialists are finally coming out of the closet and owning up to it.

So, we got that going for us.

I wonder if they asked those respondents whether they'd prefer socialism or the Constitution. Cuz you can't have both.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Wow, then a lot has changed since November.

 

[teapartysamurai]

I guess that explains the election last November.

 

[Intense]

Comrades,.... It seems the Misinformation and Censorship Programs are very effective this season.

 

[RDD_1210]

Well, at least the socialists are finally coming out of the closet and owning up to it.

So, we got that going for us.

What "we" do you speak of? You've proven repeatedly that you only are concerned with you and certainly not that "we" of this country.

 

[Intense]

Well, at least the socialists are finally coming out of the closet and owning up to it.

So, we got that going for us.

What "we" do you speak of? You've proven repeatedly that you only are concerned with you and certainly not that "we" of this country.

Just because we are Anti-Collective, it is wrong to assume that we do not care RDD_1210. We are Anti-Collective because we do care.

 

[RDD_1210]

Well, at least the socialists are finally coming out of the closet and owning up to it.

So, we got that going for us.

What "we" do you speak of? You've proven repeatedly that you only are concerned with you and certainly not that "we" of this country.

Just because we are Anti-Collective, it is wrong to assume that we do not care RDD_1210. We are Anti-Collective because we do care.

Ahh ok, Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Intense]

 

[Intense]

Well, at least the socialists are finally coming out of the closet and owning up to it.

So, we got that going for us.

I wonder if they asked those respondents whether they'd prefer socialism or the Constitution. Cuz you can't have both.

well yes you can, because we have had it for the whole of are nation...

But dont let facts get in the way of that...

The Part of Our System that is dependent on the Whole was Government, which Regulated by design and did not produce. Once Upon a time it's Powers were Enumerated. Can you say that? E-num-era-ted. Very good!


Here is another Bed Time Story for you.....


The Emperor’s New Suit
by
Hans Christian Andersen
(1837)
ANY, many years ago lived an emperor, who thought so much of new clothes that he spent all his money in order to obtain them; his only ambition was to be always well dressed. He did not care for his soldiers, and the theatre did not amuse him; the only thing, in fact, he thought anything of was to drive out and show a new suit of clothes. He had a coat for every hour of the day; and as one would say of a king “He is in his cabinet,” so one could say of him, “The emperor is in his dressing-room.”

The great city where he resided was very gay; every day many strangers from all parts of the globe arrived. One day two swindlers came to this city; they made people believe that they were weavers, and declared they could manufacture the finest cloth to be imagined. Their colours and patterns, they said, were not only exceptionally beautiful, but the clothes made of their material possessed the wonderful quality of being invisible to any man who was unfit for his office or unpardonably stupid.

“That must be wonderful cloth,” thought the emperor. “If I were to be dressed in a suit made of this cloth I should be able to find out which men in my empire were unfit for their places, and I could distinguish the clever from the stupid. I must have this cloth woven for me without delay.” And he gave a large sum of money to the swindlers, in advance, that they should set to work without any loss of time. They set up two looms, and pretended to be very hard at work, but they did nothing whatever on the looms. They asked for the finest silk and the most precious gold-cloth; all they got they did away with, and worked at the empty looms till late at night.

“I should very much like to know how they are getting on with the cloth,” thought the emperor. But he felt rather uneasy when he remembered that he who was not fit for his office could not see it. Personally, he was of opinion that he had nothing to fear, yet he thought it advisable to send somebody else first to see how matters stood. Everybody in the town knew what a remarkable quality the stuff possessed, and all were anxious to see how bad or stupid their neighbours were.

“I shall send my honest old minister to the weavers,” thought the emperor. “He can judge best how the stuff looks, for he is intelligent, and nobody understands his office better than he.”

The good old minister went into the room where the swindlers sat before the empty looms. “Heaven preserve us!” he thought, and opened his eyes wide, “I cannot see anything at all,” but he did not say so. Both swindlers requested him to come near, and asked him if he did not admire the exquisite pattern and the beautiful colours, pointing to the empty looms. The poor old minister tried his very best, but he could see nothing, for there was nothing to be seen. “Oh dear,” he thought, “can I be so stupid? I should never have thought so, and nobody must know it! Is it possible that I am not fit for my office? No, no, I cannot say that I was unable to see the cloth.”

“Now, have you got nothing to say?” said one of the swindlers, while he pretended to be busily weaving........

Hans Christian Andersen: The Emperor?s New Suit

 

[whitehall]

Good, go with that concept lefties. Support actual socialist politicians instead of covert socialist politicians next time around and see what happens.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What percentage of people responding know what the word "Socialism" means?

If the rest of the world is anything this message board, I'd bet very few.

 

[The Infidel]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz i dont read longwinded bores.

the government has always "produced". In realityland stating socialism and the constitution dont go hand and hand is foolish.

Our constitution can work in a more socialist society Or capitalistic society. there has always been and should always be a flex to the document.

That is the problem with you libs.... The Constitution is not a living breathing document that you can just change or "flex" to your needs.... there is a process to "ammend" it, but not "flex" it

Back up your statement that "socialism and the constitution can go hand and hand" b/c that is loonie.
An example of how that works would be nice.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz i dont read longwinded bores.

the government has always "produced". In realityland stating socialism and the constitution dont go hand and hand is foolish.

Our constitution can work in a more socialist society Or capitalistic society. there has always been and should always be a flex to the document.

That is the problem with you libs.... The Constitution is not a living breathing document that you can just change or "flex" to your needs.... there is a process to "ammend" it, but not "flex" it

Back up your statement that "socialism and the constitution can go hand and hand" b/c that is loonie.
An example of how that works would be nice.

Where in the Constitution does it lay down capitalism as the economic system of the US?

 

[The Infidel]

What percentage of people responding know what the word "Socialism" means?

If the rest of the world is anything this message board, I'd bet very few.

"(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."


Oh yeah.... thats constitutional

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What percentage of people responding know what the word "Socialism" means?

If the rest of the world is anything this message board, I'd bet very few.

"(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."


Oh yeah.... thats constitutional

Bzz, wrong definition.

Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Educate yourself.

 

[The Infidel]

What percentage of people responding know what the word "Socialism" means?

If the rest of the world is anything this message board, I'd bet very few.

"(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."


Oh yeah.... thats constitutional

Bzz, wrong definition.

Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Educate yourself.

Bzz, wrong definition.

Socialism | Define Socialism at Dictionary.com

I said in Marxist theory.... which is what you espouse, so you educate yourself.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

"(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles."


Oh yeah.... thats constitutional

Bzz, wrong definition.

Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Educate yourself.

Bzz, wrong definition.

Socialism | Define Socialism at Dictionary.com

I said in Marxist theory.... which is what you espouse, so you educate yourself.

You think I "espouse" Marxist theory?

HAHAHAHAAA. Now that's funny.

"Socialism" as a stage in Marxist theory has nothing to do with "Socialism" as a economic system.

Hence why your definition is WRONG.

BTW, dumbass - I'm not a socialist, or a marxist, or a communist, or any other word that you don't know the meaning of.

I'm a capitalist.