So with the facts there ARE communist countries and the facts 149 million people killed by communists governments, where in the hell
does Obama get off by saying there is "little difference"? Not one human life was caused by capitalism killing people consciously or as part of a methodical plan to exterminate enemies.
If this idiot president can't tell the difference and idiots voted for him twice it really is a sad statement on America's future!
These people, and Obama, have no idea. They all want to sing the praises of Socialism, and very possibly, Communism. Why don't you ask them a few questions------->
1. What country has gotten wealthy under Socialism? Is it not true that they either turned Socialist AFTER becoming wealthy, or had to take on more capitalistic form to become wealthy?
2. Why do they talk about Denmark, when their own President says they are a market economy, and NOT Socialist?
3. When did China start to prosper, when they became more free market, or when they were not?
4. Is the United States "national debt," due to capitalism, or due to the Socialistic policies of some of its programs? And is it NOT true, that as we add more Socialistic policies, our "national debt" rises.
5. Who consistently has the largest economy in the world, the Capitalistic United States, or the Socialistic countries, and how long has that been a fact! And with a larger economy in motion, does that NOT mean it is easier for citizens to get a piece of a much larger pie, that is created by far fewer people.
These are just facts in evidence, and all some of these people have are feel good ideas. They never address how to pay for any of their ideas, and in fact wish to install more ideas without ever paying off the losses of their past ideas. They should tell all of us how much spending has taken place on the "war on poverty," and the result from that spending. How much money do we throw at the Federal Education system compared to other countries, and how that has worked out.
But no, they do not want to talk about their "Socialistic" programs that have failed miserably, because to do so shows are ridiculous they are. They want to talk about NEW programs, and use "buzz words" to make you defensive. They can't talk about it on a substantive level, they have to go to their buzz words. They fear actual debate.
It is what it is, and they are winning, and that is a fact. And when you do nail them, their response is always something akin to, "there is nothing you will be able to do about it, very soon." Maybe they are correct, but that doesn't mean we should quit trying!