Should Sanders adopt this mantra?

[Arianrhod]

You pro Bernie people do realize that Bernie has promoted expanding the government and government welfare programs for years? Do you really think this, and the costs of the same, is really what we need right now?

If you understood where the revenue came from, you'd have a much better argument.

And it's "diehard," like the movies.

 

[Arianrhod]

"..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means…"
________

The O. P. contained the above quote to which I take umbrage.

I think that all of the O.P.'s posts are imbued with a priceless concurrence of impudence and stupidity.

I doubt that the O.P. understands how "Socialism" actually works. Numbskulls, like the O. P., have repeatedly believed that they have it figured out. One of the latest iterations is:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which sounds good to the very young and the very foolish...those who have never taken the time to investigate past experiences and outcomes...they are always the same.....Failure, again and again...because Human Nature is intimately, inextricably involved....and it doesn't change, except maybe over the eons.

In actual Socialistic practice, as the Russians learned most recently....the Needy always turn out to be way more numerous than the Able (& willing to Work Hard). The cancer of Socialism.....for which there is no cure...is that the class of the Needy constantly grows, with a consequent diminishment in the group who's Incentive to be productive has been taken away.

That's it. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed....a more complicated and far vaster undertaking than the Utopian Communes they used to try from time to time in America...but with the same dependence on Human Nature being something it is not....and so with the same inevitable failure.

I think the O. P. is an imbecile filled with childish fallacies...which he shares with us a bit too often.

You've done an excellent job of proving Dot Com's point. Thank you.

 

[MACAULAY]

"..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means…"
________

The O. P. contained the above quote to which I take umbrage.

I think that all of the O.P.'s posts are imbued with a priceless concurrence of impudence and stupidity.

I doubt that the O.P. understands how "Socialism" actually works. Numbskulls, like the O. P., have repeatedly believed that they have it figured out. One of the latest iterations is:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which sounds good to the very young and the very foolish...those who have never taken the time to investigate past experiences and outcomes...they are always the same.....Failure, again and again...because Human Nature is intimately, inextricably involved....and it doesn't change, except maybe over the eons.

In actual Socialistic practice, as the Russians learned most recently....the Needy always turn out to be way more numerous than the Able (& willing to Work Hard). The cancer of Socialism.....for which there is no cure...is that the class of the Needy constantly grows, with a consequent diminishment in the group who's Incentive to be productive has been taken away.

That's it. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed....a more complicated and far vaster undertaking than the Utopian Communes they used to try from time to time in America...but with the same dependence on Human Nature being something it is not....and so with the same inevitable failure.

I think the O. P. is an imbecile filled with childish fallacies...which he shares with us a bit too often.

You've done an excellent job of proving Dot Com's point. Thank you.

_______________________

And you have done nothing to refute my point.

Referring me back to another Pinhead who did nothing but call people names who disagree with him...that's not a rebuttal....that's nothing more than the standard Pinhead/Loon/Socialist/Hypocrite Response on this board.

See, anybody can call names. But, I made some points in my post which constitute Political Discussion....which was what this Board is for. Will you undertake to engage in it?

You responded to my post. You should include in that response an actual response. You are welcome to try again..or get fucked.

 

[nat4900]

A Socialist is nothing more than a Communist armed with the ballot!

Did you read that in some Chinese fortune cookie?

Check out how many people have declared bankruptcy because of medical/hospital costs in the U.S.....versus any other industrialized country.....

Check out if ANY European country has enslaved their young folks with over $1.4 TRILLION in student debt....

 

[nat4900]

"..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means…"
________

The O. P. contained the above quote to which I take umbrage.

I think that all of the O.P.'s posts are imbued with a priceless concurrence of impudence and stupidity.

I doubt that the O.P. understands how "Socialism" actually works. Numbskulls, like the O. P., have repeatedly believed that they have it figured out. One of the latest iterations is:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which sounds good to the very young and the very foolish...those who have never taken the time to investigate past experiences and outcomes...they are always the same.....Failure, again and again...because Human Nature is intimately, inextricably involved....and it doesn't change, except maybe over the eons.

In actual Socialistic practice, as the Russians learned most recently....the Needy always turn out to be way more numerous than the Able (& willing to Work Hard). The cancer of Socialism.....for which there is no cure...is that the class of the Needy constantly grows, with a consequent diminishment in the group who's Incentive to be productive has been taken away.

That's it. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed....a more complicated and far vaster undertaking than the Utopian Communes they used to try from time to time in America...but with the same dependence on Human Nature being something it is not....and so with the same inevitable failure.

I think the O. P. is an imbecile filled with childish fallacies...which he shares with us a bit too often.

You could have just as well stated (and it'd be briefer) that you have absolutely NO idea as to what a social democracy entails, except what the "renowned" Sean Hannity told you......

The Armed Forces is a socialistic enterprise....
The U.S. Post Office is a socialistic enterprise....
....and, YES, even the RNC is a socialistic enterprise.....

 

[alpine]

"..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means…"
________

The O. P. contained the above quote to which I take umbrage.

I think that all of the O.P.'s posts are imbued with a priceless concurrence of impudence and stupidity.

I doubt that the O.P. understands how "Socialism" actually works. Numbskulls, like the O. P., have repeatedly believed that they have it figured out. One of the latest iterations is:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which sounds good to the very young and the very foolish...those who have never taken the time to investigate past experiences and outcomes...they are always the same.....Failure, again and again...because Human Nature is intimately, inextricably involved....and it doesn't change, except maybe over the eons.

In actual Socialistic practice, as the Russians learned most recently....the Needy always turn out to be way more numerous than the Able (& willing to Work Hard). The cancer of Socialism.....for which there is no cure...is that the class of the Needy constantly grows, with a consequent diminishment in the group who's Incentive to be productive has been taken away.

That's it. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed....a more complicated and far vaster undertaking than the Utopian Communes they used to try from time to time in America...but with the same dependence on Human Nature being something it is not....and so with the same inevitable failure.

I think the O. P. is an imbecile filled with childish fallacies...which he shares with us a bit too often.

As far as Sanders is concerned, I don't think he is a socialist. I think he is more in the lines of a social democrat. Still believes in the free market, but wanting to take precautions so it doesn't hurt people like it did some years ago.

Or I could be totally wrong and he could be a socialist wanting to overhaul the whole free market system and replace it with,... well, with a socialist market system

One thing certain, he is not so clear about this part...

 

[alpine]

"..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means…"
________

The O. P. contained the above quote to which I take umbrage.

I think that all of the O.P.'s posts are imbued with a priceless concurrence of impudence and stupidity.

I doubt that the O.P. understands how "Socialism" actually works. Numbskulls, like the O. P., have repeatedly believed that they have it figured out. One of the latest iterations is:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which sounds good to the very young and the very foolish...those who have never taken the time to investigate past experiences and outcomes...they are always the same.....Failure, again and again...because Human Nature is intimately, inextricably involved....and it doesn't change, except maybe over the eons.

In actual Socialistic practice, as the Russians learned most recently....the Needy always turn out to be way more numerous than the Able (& willing to Work Hard). The cancer of Socialism.....for which there is no cure...is that the class of the Needy constantly grows, with a consequent diminishment in the group who's Incentive to be productive has been taken away.

That's it. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed....a more complicated and far vaster undertaking than the Utopian Communes they used to try from time to time in America...but with the same dependence on Human Nature being something it is not....and so with the same inevitable failure.

I think the O. P. is an imbecile filled with childish fallacies...which he shares with us a bit too often.

You could have just as well stated (and it'd be briefer) that you have absolutely NO idea as to what a social democracy entails, except what the "renowned" Sean Hannity told you......

The Armed Forces is a socialistic enterprise....
The U.S. Post Office is a socialistic enterprise....
....and, YES, even the RNC is a socialistic enterprise.....

Social democracy and democratic socialism are different things...

 

[Arianrhod]

"..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means…"
________

The O. P. contained the above quote to which I take umbrage.

I think that all of the O.P.'s posts are imbued with a priceless concurrence of impudence and stupidity.

I doubt that the O.P. understands how "Socialism" actually works. Numbskulls, like the O. P., have repeatedly believed that they have it figured out. One of the latest iterations is:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which sounds good to the very young and the very foolish...those who have never taken the time to investigate past experiences and outcomes...they are always the same.....Failure, again and again...because Human Nature is intimately, inextricably involved....and it doesn't change, except maybe over the eons.

In actual Socialistic practice, as the Russians learned most recently....the Needy always turn out to be way more numerous than the Able (& willing to Work Hard). The cancer of Socialism.....for which there is no cure...is that the class of the Needy constantly grows, with a consequent diminishment in the group who's Incentive to be productive has been taken away.

That's it. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed....a more complicated and far vaster undertaking than the Utopian Communes they used to try from time to time in America...but with the same dependence on Human Nature being something it is not....and so with the same inevitable failure.

I think the O. P. is an imbecile filled with childish fallacies...which he shares with us a bit too often.

You've done an excellent job of proving Dot Com's point. Thank you.

_______________________

And you have done nothing to refute my point.

I concede that you've attached one meaning and one meaning alone to a word that frightens you. That's irrefutable.

 

[BULLDOG]

And Sanders will legalize pot...So he has my vote..

Hillary will too. She doesn't talk about it as much, but the country has reached that point. Why stir up the RWNJs now, when it's gonna happen anyway?

 

[MACAULAY]

"..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means…"
________

The O. P. contained the above quote to which I take umbrage.

I think that all of the O.P.'s posts are imbued with a priceless concurrence of impudence and stupidity.

I doubt that the O.P. understands how "Socialism" actually works. Numbskulls, like the O. P., have repeatedly believed that they have it figured out. One of the latest iterations is:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which sounds good to the very young and the very foolish...those who have never taken the time to investigate past experiences and outcomes...they are always the same.....Failure, again and again...because Human Nature is intimately, inextricably involved....and it doesn't change, except maybe over the eons.

In actual Socialistic practice, as the Russians learned most recently....the Needy always turn out to be way more numerous than the Able (& willing to Work Hard). The cancer of Socialism.....for which there is no cure...is that the class of the Needy constantly grows, with a consequent diminishment in the group who's Incentive to be productive has been taken away.

That's it. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed....a more complicated and far vaster undertaking than the Utopian Communes they used to try from time to time in America...but with the same dependence on Human Nature being something it is not....and so with the same inevitable failure.

I think the O. P. is an imbecile filled with childish fallacies...which he shares with us a bit too often.

You could have just as well stated (and it'd be briefer) that you have absolutely NO idea as to what a social democracy entails, except what the "renowned" Sean Hannity told you......

The Armed Forces is a socialistic enterprise....
The U.S. Post Office is a socialistic enterprise....
....and, YES, even the RNC is a socialistic enterprise.....

_______________________________________

I realize that there is a frontier between ideologies at which things can be blurred....that is true in all things. I realize that sometimes Socialist takeovers are very gradual...that they often call themselves something else at first...but the end is always the same...and so I am unpersuaded by the fact that the Socialist collapse has not yet occurred in some places. How's Greece? I expect you have taken it off your list of examples. Sweden is it still there?

What you are attempting to do is adopt, as your Socialist Slogan is: "Provide for the Common Defense & Promote the General Welfare".

History has taught us to see that as a temporary ruse. Some of us anyway.

 

[alpine]

"..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means…"
________

The O. P. contained the above quote to which I take umbrage.

I think that all of the O.P.'s posts are imbued with a priceless concurrence of impudence and stupidity.

I doubt that the O.P. understands how "Socialism" actually works. Numbskulls, like the O. P., have repeatedly believed that they have it figured out. One of the latest iterations is:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Which sounds good to the very young and the very foolish...those who have never taken the time to investigate past experiences and outcomes...they are always the same.....Failure, again and again...because Human Nature is intimately, inextricably involved....and it doesn't change, except maybe over the eons.

In actual Socialistic practice, as the Russians learned most recently....the Needy always turn out to be way more numerous than the Able (& willing to Work Hard). The cancer of Socialism.....for which there is no cure...is that the class of the Needy constantly grows, with a consequent diminishment in the group who's Incentive to be productive has been taken away.

That's it. That's why the Soviet Union collapsed....a more complicated and far vaster undertaking than the Utopian Communes they used to try from time to time in America...but with the same dependence on Human Nature being something it is not....and so with the same inevitable failure.

I think the O. P. is an imbecile filled with childish fallacies...which he shares with us a bit too often.

You could have just as well stated (and it'd be briefer) that you have absolutely NO idea as to what a social democracy entails, except what the "renowned" Sean Hannity told you......

The Armed Forces is a socialistic enterprise....
The U.S. Post Office is a socialistic enterprise....
....and, YES, even the RNC is a socialistic enterprise.....

_______________________________________

I realize that there is a frontier between ideologies at which things can be blurred....that is true in all things. I realize that sometimes Socialist takeovers are very gradual...that they often call themselves something else at first...but the end is always the same...and so I am unpersuaded by the fact that the Socialist collapse has not yet occurred in some places. How's Greece? I expect you have taken it off your list of examples. Sweden is it still there?

What you are attempting to do is adopt, as your Socialist Slogan is: "Provide for the Common Defense & Promote the General Welfare".

History has taught us to see that as a temporary ruse. Some of us anyway.

Greece was pretty conservative while collapsing.

Socialist SYRIZA came into power after the collapse.

And they have a social democrat PASOK running against a democratic socialist SYRIZA

This shows how different ideologies can be, even tho they sounded so similar and transitivity between these could be limited or less limited, depending on the situations voters are in.

 

[irosie91]

Sanders well knows that were he to win the nomination, right wingers would try to deride the fact that he is a socialist democrat (as if they knew what that really meant.)…..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means….

However, should Sanders point out that he would be the first Jew to run for president? (Lieberman wan for the VP slot.)……After all, conservatives have long stated that they are the champions in supporting Israel………If Hillary can flaunt the gender card, and Rubio/Cruz can flaunt their Hispanic bona fides, why can’t Sanders flaunt his religious heritage?[/QUOTe


sanders should give up------as for Playing the jew card-----it does not matter---those who care already know

 

[Arianrhod]

sanders should give up------as for Playing the jew card-----it does not matter---those who care already know

Don't be shy. Tell us what you really think.

 

[irosie91]

sanders should give up------as for Playing the jew card-----it does not matter---those who care already know

Don't be shy. Tell us what you really think.

sanders is not a contender------too socialistic in his PROMISES----he
promises lots of nice stuff that he cannot do and has not real PLAN

 

[Agit8r]

However, should Sanders point out that he would be the first Jew to run for president?

Well, on a major party ticket. Eugene Debs back in 1920 comes to mind.

 

[Arianrhod]

sanders should give up------as for Playing the jew card-----it does not matter---those who care already know

Don't be shy. Tell us what you really think.

sanders is not a contender------too socialistic in his PROMISES----he
promises lots of nice stuff that he cannot do and has not real PLAN

Now I know why y'all think "Democrat party" is an actual thing. You took the adjectival ending and stuck it on "socialistic."

English as a First Language, challenging the RW since at least 2001...

 

[irosie91]

However, should Sanders point out that he would be the first Jew to run for president?

Well, on a major party ticket. Eugene Debs back in 1920 comes to mind.

Eugene Debs was not jewish. Islamo Nazis just SAY he was because he was a socialist and unionis

 

[irosie91]

sanders should give up------as for Playing the jew card-----it does not matter---those who care already know

Don't be shy. Tell us what you really think.

sanders is not a contender------too socialistic in his PROMISES----he
promises lots of nice stuff that he cannot do and has not real PLAN

Now I know why y'all think "Democrat party" is an actual thing. You took the adjectival ending and stuck it on "socialistic."

English as a First Language, challenging the RW since at least 2001...

you know something now? very good-----what is it?

 

[the_human_being]

Sanders well knows that were he to win the nomination, right wingers would try to deride the fact that he is a socialist democrat (as if they knew what that really meant.)…..relying on the fact that the conservative base is too dumb to research what “socialism” really means….

However, should Sanders point out that he would be the first Jew to run for president? (Lieberman wan for the VP slot.)……After all, conservatives have long stated that they are the champions in supporting Israel………If Hillary can flaunt the gender card, and Rubio/Cruz can flaunt their Hispanic bona fides, why can’t Sanders flaunt his religious heritage?

The conservative base is chock-full-of know- nothing, mouth-breathers hence the ravings of iceweasel, Redfish, Soggy in Nola, etc...

Their retorts consist of "YABUT SOCIALIST!!!

Strange that the know-nothings have fielded a racial mixture of candidates while you Liberals just have two old white "GUYS" campaigning. It's also strange that the Republicans are pretty well leading in the national polling. But do carry on with your bigotry.

We did vote in the first black president, not once, but twice.

And lost every election since. LOL!!

 

[Arianrhod]

sanders should give up------as for Playing the jew card-----it does not matter---those who care already know

Don't be shy. Tell us what you really think.

sanders is not a contender------too socialistic in his PROMISES----he
promises lots of nice stuff that he cannot do and has not real PLAN

Now I know why y'all think "Democrat party" is an actual thing. You took the adjectival ending and stuck it on "socialistic."

English as a First Language, challenging the RW since at least 2001...

you know something now? very good-----what is it?

What part of my post confused you?