The Contiuum of Psycosis.

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
124,898
60,271
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
Came across a passage about Lenin that reminded me of a connection to Obama...see if you find same:

1. In a speech delivered at the Riverside Church in New York on Human Rights Sunday, President Carter's 'golden boy,' Andrew Young said by way of explaining the famines under the Soviets:

“. . One lives in a land where, in most of that land, the sun sets as early as three o’clock in the afternoon, and where the planting season is minimal. Under those circumstances the struggle for human rights inevitably becomes far more economic in its expression than it would in a country such as ours, where we almost take it for granted that anything can grow almost anywhere year ’round.”

a. Nonsense, of course: "The rich dark soil and the vast fields of wheat and other food products have earned Ukraine the nickname "bread basket of Europe." According to the CIA World Factbook, Ukraine produced 25% of all agricultural output in the former Soviet Union. Today, Ukraine exports substantial amounts of grain, vegetables, sugar beets, sunflower seeds, milk and meat. The Bread Basket of Europe — Infoplease.com

b. Obviously, Andrew Young is not a farmer…On the other hand, one might say that the Soviet Union has endured poor weather since, roughly, October 1917.

c. One must ask why this Carter cabinet member felt it necessary to engender sympathy for the Soviets, and downplay the depredations of communism.



2. Before anyone begins to believe that the communists began their war on their own people after the Revolution, read Lenin’s embracing of the cleansing effects of famine, as far back as 1891, in order to facilitate the creation of “a new industrial proletariat which would take over from the bourgeoisie…Famine, in destroying the outdated peasant economy, would bring about the next stage more rapidly, and usher in socialism, the stage that necessarily followed capitalism.” Coutois, et.al., “The Black Book of Communism,” p. 123, 124.

a. Once in power, the communists built their own famines.

So, the Soviet Communists has zero concern for lives, even the lives of their own people. Can we find similar thinking in the United States?



3. Who was personally selected by Barack Obama to be his director of Obama’s Office of Science and Technology Policy-? Our very own Lenin, John Holdren:

a. "...in Human Ecology, where Holdren and the Ehrlichs wrote: “Political pressure must be applied immediately to induce the United States government to assume its responsibility to halt the growth of the American population
Obama Adviser’s Green Manifesto: Americans Will Be Better Off When They Work, Produce and Earn Less - HUMAN EVENTS

b.•Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
•The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;
•Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
•People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
•A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force.

Confederate Yankee: Obama's Science Czar Wrote Book Advocating Forced Abortions, Sterilizing Americans By Poisoning Our Drinking Water

Once a vote is cast for a leftist who would agree with and appoint a John Holdren, then one is agreeing with the same insanity that produced one hundred million deaths.


A line can be drawn in the thought processes, such as they are, from Lenin, to Carter and Andrew Young, to Obama and John Holdren.
You down with this?
 
Last edited:
During the 2008 Presidential Election, I had a discussion on another board with another guy who claimed that Obama wasn't really a Communist or a Socialist in the traditional sense but that Obama was a "nice socialist" without all the killing and controlling of people. :D

Doesn't look too nice to me.
 
Last edited:
During the 2008 Presidential Election, I had a discussion on another board with another guy who claimed that Obama wasn't really a Communist or a Socialist in the traditional sense but that Obama was a "nice socialist" without all the killing and controlling of people. :D

Doesn't look too nice to me.

I believe more and more folks agree with you as far as his policies....

for me, I can't see how one separates the policy from the initiator....
 
Acts 4:31-35 (The Believers Shate Their Possessions)

31 After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all

34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales

35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+4&version=NIV

- they were all filled with the Holy Spirit

- All the believers were one in heart and mind

- No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own (The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property - Karl Marx)

- they shared everything they had.

- there were no needy persons among them

- For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales (From each according to his abilities ...)

- it (money) was distributed to anyone who had need (... to each according to his needs. (Karl Marx))

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
(Karl Marx)

Perhaps "PoliticalChic and "The Confederate Yankee" could also make a convincing case that the Apostle Luke (author of Acts) and the early Christian Believers, while under the influence of the Holy Spirit, were "closet communists" and therefore anti-American!


http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/k/karl_marx_3.html#ixzz1IOmj1EqQ
 
Last edited:
Acts 4:31-35 (The Believers Shate Their Possessions)

31 After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all

34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales

35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

Acts 4 - Passage Lookup - New International Version, ©2011 - BibleGateway.com

- they were all filled with the Holy Spirit

- All the believers were one in heart and mind

- No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own

- they shared everything they had.

- there were no needy persons among them

- it (money) was distributed to anyone who had need

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzH1o44K7y0]YouTube - This is John Galt speaking... PART ONE.flv[/ame]
 
Acts 4:31-35 (The Believers Shate Their Possessions)

31 After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all

34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales

35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

Acts 4 - Passage*Lookup - New International Version, ©2011 - BibleGateway.com

- they were all filled with the Holy Spirit

- All the believers were one in heart and mind

- No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own (The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property - Karl Marx)

- they shared everything they had.

- there were no needy persons among them

- For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales (From each according to his abilities ...)

- it (money) was distributed to anyone who had need (... to each according to his needs. (Karl Marx))

From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
(Karl Marx)

Perhaps "PoliticalChic and "The Confederate Yankee" could also make a convincing case that the Apostle Luke (author of Acts) and the early Christian Believers, while under the influence of the Holy Spirit, were "closet communists" and therefore anti-American!


Karl Marx Quotes - Page 3 - BrainyQuote

Christians are not "closet" communists...that is a false claim made by some marxist lefties...which may also include some misled marxist Christians as well... because although many early Christians vowed the discipline of poverty to lead a religious life...it was not imposed upon them by Christianity....there were rich Christians too....communism on the other hand arbitrarily imposes "sharing" among people via force...Christianity does not...

“Would the religious life constitute an obstacle to the right of property? For in religious life, communism, or poverty, is the rule. Would this not be, then, an ideal for which it is necessary to strive? Did not the early Christians install among themselves a true communism (cf. Acts 4:32)?

“Saint Thomas does not neglect this objection but rather he placed it in proper perspective. Neither religious life nor the ‘communism’ of the early Christians constitutes a serious obstacle to the legitimacy of private property. For the objection to have any value, the community of goods realized in the primitive Church would have had to have been imposed upon the faithful, and religious life would have to be a precept, and not a counsel. The perfection of the evangelical counsel does not exclude the licitness of a different practice, which, of itself, conforms to natural law.

“The argument [of Saint Thomas] (Sed Contra, II-II, quest. 66, art. 2; also Summa Contra Gentiles, bk. 3:II, chap. 127, 8) supports this response perfectly. Saint Thomas, in effect, recalls the heresy of the Apostolici mentioned by Saint Augustine (“De Haeresibus,” no. 40, in P. L., vol. 42, col. 32): ‘The Apostolici,’ writes St. Augustine, ‘assumed that name with an extreme arrogance, because they refused from their communion married persons and those who possessed property, such as both monks and clerics who in considerable number are to be found in the Catholic Church. But the Apostolici are heretics precisely because, separating themselves from the Church, they consider condemned those who make use of these goods, of which they deprive themselves.’

“‘The heresy of the Apostolici does not lie in taking the vows of chastity and poverty: monks and numerous clerics do the same. But the error lies in wanting to impose the same discipline on all the faithful under pain of condemnation.’ And St. Thomas concludes: ‘It is, therefore, an error to say that it is not permitted for a man to possess property.’

“This response is of use a fortiori for the problem presented by the perfection of evangelical poverty. Religious life, be it in a monastery provided with an income or in a community living from alms, is a life of counsel, not of precept, and it cannot be imposed on everyone. Moreover, even from the point of view of the perfection of the spiritual life, St. Thomas shows that the evangelical counsel of poverty most absolutely does not prevent the rich from sanctifying themselves amidst riches: ‘Great was the virtue of Abraham, who, possessing great riches, nonetheless knew how to keep his heart free from love for his riches. . . .’

http://www.tfp.org/tfp-home/catholic-perspective/were-the-early-christians-communists.html
 
acts 4:31-35 (the believers shate their possessions)

31 after they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the holy spirit and spoke the word of god boldly.

32 all the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

33 with great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the lord jesus. And god’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all

34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales

35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

Acts 4 - Passage Lookup - New International Version, ©2011 - BibleGateway.com

- they were all filled with the holy spirit

- all the believers were one in heart and mind

- no one claimed that any of their possessions was their own (the theory of communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property - karl marx)

- they shared everything they had.

- there were no needy persons among them

- for from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales (from each according to his abilities ...)

- it (money) was distributed to anyone who had need (... To each according to his needs. (karl marx))

from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
(karl marx)

perhaps "politicalchic and "the confederate yankee" could also make a convincing case that the apostle luke (author of acts) and the early christian believers, while under the influence of the holy spirit, were "closet communists" and therefore anti-american!

Karl Marx Quotes - Page 3 - BrainyQuote


*idiot*
 
Somebody did not read Acts 5 where Ananias and Sapphira were struck dead for false witness not for withholding some of their own money from the congregation while claiming they didn't or at least so said Peter when his ruling condemned them in separate church trials.
 
Came across a passage about Lenin that reminded me of a connection to Obama...see if you find same:

1. In a speech delivered at the Riverside Church in New York on Human Rights Sunday, President Carter's 'golden boy,' Andrew Young said by way of explaining the famines under the Soviets:

“. . One lives in a land where, in most of that land, the sun sets as early as three o’clock in the afternoon, and where the planting season is minimal. Under those circumstances the struggle for human rights inevitably becomes far more economic in its expression than it would in a country such as ours, where we almost take it for granted that anything can grow almost anywhere year ’round.”
The further north one's latitude is, the later the sun sets in late spring and summer; vice versa for late fall and winter. I think a lot of their problems in agriculture are wind and soil, and most of all the centralization and collectivization of farming, not as Andrew Young claims. He missed all the really important issues. A

nd not much is grown year round in America except in the Imperial Valley of California, in southern California not far north of Mexico, and that allows two crops per year, but not year round round growing.

Canada does quite well in grain farming in northern latitudes.Canada as well as some northern European countries enjoy year round growing of winter wheat; triticales.
 
Acts 4:31-35 (The Believers Shate Their Possessions)

31 After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.

32 All the believers were one in heart and mind.
No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all

34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales

35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need

Christians are not "closet" communists...that is a false claim made by some marxist lefties...which may also include some misled marxist Christians as well... because although many early Christians vowed the discipline of poverty to lead a religious life...it was not imposed upon them by Christianity....there were rich Christians too....communism on the other hand arbitrarily imposes "sharing" among people via force...Christianity does not.
"ScreamingEagle" makes an interesting rebutal BUT omits 2 important facts.

1. The early Believers made the decision to share everything they had (verse 31) only after they "were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly." (verse 31)

Modern Christians could do alot worse than to follow the example set by the early Believers while under the influence of the Holy Spirit.

2. "ScreamingEagle" argues that Christianity does not impose sharing and yet verse 32 is quite explicit that, while filled with the Holy Spirit, not SOME, but "ALL the believers were one in heart and mind ....."

Assuming that Acts 4:31-35 wasn't placed in the New Testament by the Apostle Luke to fill up space or some other arbitrary purpose, perhaps my esteemed critic(s) would care to explain what purpose "The Believers Share Their Possessions" serves for Christians?
 
Last edited:
Somebody did not read Acts 5 where Ananias and Sapphira were struck dead for false witness not for withholding some of their own money from the congregation while claiming they didn't or at least so said Peter when his ruling condemned them in separate church trials.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but I do know many people miss the message. Ananias lied to God. Peter even pointed out that Ananias was in control of his money and could give or keep it as he saw fit. Instead, he chose to lie as did his wife and they were both struck down.
 
Acts 4:31-35 (the believers shate their possessions)

31 after they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the holy spirit and spoke the word of god boldly.

32 all the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.

33 with great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the lord jesus. And god’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all

34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales

35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

Acts 4 - Passage*Lookup - New International Version, ©2011 - BibleGateway.com

- they were all filled with the holy spirit

- all the believers were one in heart and mind

- no one claimed that any of their possessions was their own (the theory of communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property - karl marx)

- they shared everything they had.

- there were no needy persons among them

- for from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales (from each according to his abilities ...)

- it (money) was distributed to anyone who had need (... To each according to his needs. (karl marx))

from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
(karl marx)

perhaps "politicalchic and "the confederate yankee" could also make a convincing case that the apostle luke (author of acts) and the early christian believers, while under the influence of the holy spirit, were "closet communists" and therefore anti-american!

Karl Marx Quotes - Page 3 - BrainyQuote

*idiot*
*Obviously a Biblical scholar who has given this a great deal of thought!*
 
Last edited:
fred thompson was the opposite of, mR. thompsonin the novel, but the juxtapositioning is clever.

it's the wrong time to have spending of any kind, much less wasteful.

when i was working at street level for wage and trying to survive; i wasn't making much money, and i had lots of bills.
my friends and i laughed about our financial policy we called "food and gas". it was a reference to the essentials, heat, rent.. etc.

everything else was put on hold. it wasn't as much fun as having disposable income, but we did it, and we made it through the tough times. "food and gas" included beer, but the cheap kind.
 
Last edited:
I'm still cracking over the thread title.

The what of what??

:lol::lol::lol:
I used to be a Grammar Nazi too. But after a while I realized that it adds nothing to the conversation. I don't correct peoples speech when I'm talking to them directly, so why would I do it on a message board? :confused:
 
I'm still cracking over the thread title.

The what of what??

:lol::lol::lol:
I used to be a Grammar Nazi too. But after a while I realized that it adds nothing to the conversation. I don't correct peoples speech when I'm talking to them directly, so why would I do it on a message board? :confused:

You got to admit it's a little perplexing..and funny all at once.:lol:
 
These people like the OP are blissfully oblivious to the simple fact that as president Obama hasn't done much of anything that can be honestly characterized as remarkably socialist.

(Except of course to the paranoid who see the socialism boogie man around every corner.)
 
Came across a passage about Lenin that reminded me of a connection to Obama...see if you find same:

1. In a speech delivered at the Riverside Church in New York on Human Rights Sunday, President Carter's 'golden boy,' Andrew Young said by way of explaining the famines under the Soviets:

“. . One lives in a land where, in most of that land, the sun sets as early as three o’clock in the afternoon, and where the planting season is minimal. Under those circumstances the struggle for human rights inevitably becomes far more economic in its expression than it would in a country such as ours, where we almost take it for granted that anything can grow almost anywhere year ’round.”

a. Nonsense, of course: "The rich dark soil and the vast fields of wheat and other food products have earned Ukraine the nickname "bread basket of Europe." According to the CIA World Factbook, Ukraine produced 25% of all agricultural output in the former Soviet Union. Today, Ukraine exports substantial amounts of grain, vegetables, sugar beets, sunflower seeds, milk and meat. The Bread Basket of Europe — Infoplease.com

b. Obviously, Andrew Young is not a farmer…On the other hand, one might say that the Soviet Union has endured poor weather since, roughly, October 1917.

c. One must ask why this Carter cabinet member felt it necessary to engender sympathy for the Soviets, and downplay the depredations of communism.



2. Before anyone begins to believe that the communists began their war on their own people after the Revolution, read Lenin’s embracing of the cleansing effects of famine, as far back as 1891, in order to facilitate the creation of “a new industrial proletariat which would take over from the bourgeoisie…Famine, in destroying the outdated peasant economy, would bring about the next stage more rapidly, and usher in socialism, the stage that necessarily followed capitalism.” Coutois, et.al., “The Black Book of Communism,” p. 123, 124.

a. Once in power, the communists built their own famines.

So, the Soviet Communists has zero concern for lives, even the lives of their own people. Can we find similar thinking in the United States?



3. Who was personally selected by Barack Obama to be his director of Obama’s Office of Science and Technology Policy-? Our very own Lenin, John Holdren:

a. "...in Human Ecology, where Holdren and the Ehrlichs wrote: “Political pressure must be applied immediately to induce the United States government to assume its responsibility to halt the growth of the American population
Obama Adviser’s Green Manifesto: Americans Will Be Better Off When They Work, Produce and Earn Less - HUMAN EVENTS

b.•Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
•The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;
•Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
•People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
•A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force.

Confederate Yankee: Obama's Science Czar Wrote Book Advocating Forced Abortions, Sterilizing Americans By Poisoning Our Drinking Water

Once a vote is cast for a leftist who would agree with and appoint a John Holdren, then one is agreeing with the same insanity that produced one hundred million deaths.


A line can be drawn in the thought processes, such as they are, from Lenin, to Carter and Andrew Young, to Obama and John Holdren.
You down with this?

Do you come across Lennin passages often? How does that happen, just comming across a Lennin passage? Did you mean to say that you were reading one of his books, or perhaps you were reading a book on communism that quoted him? It seems to me that one would have to actively look for passages by Lennin. I came across a post by Political Chic that reminded me Lennin, check out the above, see if you can find the same? Draw your own conclusions.
 

Forum List

Back
Top