Who is Bernie Sanders?

[Votto]

The left has no issue with forcing anyone to do anything.

That's bullshit. You're jumpinp off the deep end when you use absolutes. Care to amend your statement? All I have to do is find one exception and you're proven to be either a liar or a fool.

Last I checked, Obama was the liar. He first said health care was not a tax. Then when confronted with the notion that it was not Constitutional, it was changed to a tax. And yes, we are all forced to now buy health coverage as where before we were not.

The way socialists operates is that they force everyone to do and act the same. That's why Bernie gave up with politics at the local level and started trying to obtain absolute power over the entire country and world by seeking the Oval Office where all he has to do is write an Executive Order to get his way.

 

[Votto]

He didn't earn a steady paycheck until late in life when he landed a government job.

Bernie Sanders, The Bum Who Wants Your Money

One of his first jobs was registering people for food stamps, and it was all downhill from there.

Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shi**y carpenter,” a friend told Politico Magazine. “His carpentry was not going to support him, and didn’t.”

Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment — and this is what his friends had to say about him.



--------------------------

I got a kick out of a lady who was complaining of her health care premiums going up by about 20% this year. I was laughing because she voted for Obama twice. I just smiled and told her, if you think that is expensive just wait to Bernie is done with ya. LOL.

So why Libs are we changing Obamacare in favor of Berniecare? Is it that much a failure? I've heard people say that it is so the US can cover some 30 million uncovered citizens who do not have health care, but then, I thought that was the same line we were sold for embracing Obamacare.

How many lies can you tell exactly?

 

[miketx]

There is no limit to the lying of the libtards.

 

[Indeependent]

Because Bi-Partisan Immigration Reform that will replace 1,600,000 Americans a year with Indian Business Visas is GOOD.

 

[Votto]

There is nothing generally "wrong" with socialism, or the hundreds of chunks of socialism that might be introduced into what is nominally a capitalist economy, provided they are implemented legally, constitutionally, and voluntarily. A convent is a great example of socialism, where everyone voluntarily participates.

Social Security is a socialist initiative, as is Medicare. The National Labor Relations Act (which gave workers the RIGHT, under some circumstances to force an employer to negotiate a contract) is a socialist initiative. "Single Payer" health insurance would be a socialist initiative.

Several western European countries (including Britain and Canada) have adopted a whole cornucopia of socialist elements, that have not (yet) brought their countries to ruin.

So what's wrong with implementing these ideas, programs, and institutions in the U.S.? First of all, there is no provision in the United States Constitution that allows them to exist here. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution defines precisely what the Congress is permitted to do, and the Tenth Amendment states that the Federal government is limited to the powers that are expressly granted to it in the Constitution. So Social Security, the NLRA, and who whole raft of other Federal government programs are blatantly unconstitutional. Of course, the USSC has, by a nauseating library of rationalizations, sanctioned essentially all of them at one time or another. But if it takes 50 pages to explain why some program does not contravene the Constitution, you can be fairly certain that it does.

Second, Socialism is immoral. It posits that people are entitled to certain things, benefits, and considerations, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY EXIST, and not because of any merit or act on the part of the beneficiaries. Further, the cost of these things, benefits, and considerations can be extorted from innocent victims by force of law, under threat of incarceration, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE RESOURCES TO PAY. So the productive citizen has money taken from him against his will to pay for food, shelter, clothing, education, medical care, and cell phones, for complete strangers who have done nothing to "earn" them, and if he refuses to pay, he can have his assets confiscated, his earnings garnished, and ultimately his freedom extinguished by being incarcerated.

Socialists love the word, "free." Bernie Sanders wants "free" college education for everyone. But by "free" he means that the cost will be extorted from unsuspecting, innocent citizens who have the temerity to earn a decent wage.

As P.J. O'Rourke once poignantly observed, "If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's 'free.'"

States like MA created their own health care program. What was wrong with that? In fact, the people left winged voters of MA voted for Republican Scott Brown in order to stop Obamacare after Kennedy died. Too bad for them, Congress used Reconcilation to bypass democracy and the voices of the people of MA which bypassed the vote of Scott Brown.

This is a good example of how collectivists work. They despise democracy and are only driven by and agenda. If voters don't agree with the agenda they will be bypassed if they are able to do so.

Why would libs want to force a conservative state to accept a single payer system like MA used to have?

What are they afraid of, freedom? Competition? Wut?

 

[Votto]

Here is another interesting quote.

"Sanders suggested that dwelling on local issues was perhaps counterproductive, because it distracted activists from the real root of the problem—Washington. Sanders started a small monthly zine to promote the Liberty Union's agenda. It was called Movement."

Is local politics as useless as Sanders seems to think it is? If the federal politics continually infringe upon local politics, then the answer would have to be a resounding yes.

The kinds of things he's saying aren't that far removed from what the Tea Party is saying.

What have you been doing? playing the Tea Party LP backwards? You know that's not good for the stylus on your turn table, right?

All the left/liberalism/socialism really is comes down to one word.......insurance. They want you to give up more of your money for the insurance policy of...........free college, free healthcare, a protected minimum lifestyle, everybody is insured.

In the process, they make it virtually impossible for anyone to overcome their insurance premiums, and live a good life; better than average, by your own hard work and elbow grease.

Many people; liberals included, have asked me on more than one occasion that "if Socialism/liberalism is bad, why do so many billionaires subscribe to it, and give money to candidates that support it?"

That answer is easy peezy! Because they already have theirs! You see, if you have a 3 Billion dollars, unless the government comes up with a confiscation scheme, they can raise taxes to 70%, and you still have that 3 billion dollars. All they are doing is taxing the wealth that the money creates. Let us say that the 3 billion dollars is returning an average of 5%. If my math is correct, that would be 150 million dollars. So, if I manage to tax the capital gains (which they are really only talking about income tax rates, not capital gains, but for the sake of debate, we will make the capital gains rate at 70% to make leftist/libby's/Socialists happy) 70%, they would be taxed 105 million samolians; leaving them a paltry 45 million to live on for the year. And oh yes, they still have those 3 billion dollars!

Now, lets look at all of us! At 70%, how long would it take you to acquire your first 5 million, let alone your 1st billion? Odds are sooooooooo long on that ever happening, even if your name was Bill Gates re-incarnated, it would be a pipe dream.

This is why in Socialist societies, there is no middle class perse, just rich and poor. It is also why you should know with absolute conviction, that this country has been moving left since the 2nd term of Clinton. Why? Because it is not the rich or poor who are under pressure economically, it is we, the middle class! The rich are getting richer, and the poor are having more of us join them!

Rich, left winged, fat cats, like George Soros, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and until he ran for President, Donald Trump, have already made their fortune. Now they seek to limit upstarts and competitors by making it virtually impossible to achieve that kind of wealth without inheriting it.

 

[Votto]

It's interesting how far the socialist movement has come in the US in such a short time. .

Very true, and it's clear that more and more people are open to discussing it, defending it, and even promoting it. So why is that? I think the Right has had a significant hand in this. It could be argued that constantly screaming "socialism" every time a government program is mentioned has made many people think, "well, I think that program is okay, and they're calling it socialism, so maybe socialism is okay too."

Not to mention that many have noticed the hypocrisy of "say 'NO' to socialism, but don't touch my Medicare".

Moving to the left is never good enough, is it? There is always something out their not 100% controlled by whoever is sitting in the Oval Office. Until that has been achieved, shills like yourself still have work to do.

Bernie understands this, which is why he gave up on local politics. Now it is all about being in full control over everything so he can "fix" everything. What could possible go wrong?

 

[konradv]

Last I checked, Obama was the liar. He first said health care was not a tax. Then when confronted with the notion that it was not Constitutional, it was changed to a tax. And yes, we are all forced to now buy health coverage as where before we were not. The way socialists operates is that they force everyone to do and act the same. That's why Bernie gave up with politics at the local level and started trying to obtain absolute power over the entire country and world by seeking the Oval Office where all he has to do is write an Executive Order to get his way.

Nice try at deflection, but any lies Obama may or may not have told wasn't the issue. The issue is that you made a statement that was an absolute. I was giving you a chance to get out of it, but if you don't mind being the fool, so be it. The left would have a problem with forcing people to do all sorts of things, FOOL.

 

[Arizona Willie]

It's interesting how far the socialist movement has come in the US in such a short time. .

Very true, and it's clear that more and more people are open to discussing it, defending it, and even promoting it. So why is that? I think the Right has had a significant hand in this. It could be argued that constantly screaming "socialism" every time a government program is mentioned has made many people think, "well, I think that program is okay, and they're calling it socialism, so maybe socialism is okay too."

Not to mention that many have noticed the hypocrisy of "say 'NO' to socialism, but don't touch my Medicare".

================

Republicans love Private Enterprise and hate Socialism and they adore Insurance Companies.

They don't realize that Insurance is a Socialistic endeavor.

Money is collected from many and disbursed to the few who need it.

The very definition of Socialism.

And the companies get a profit on top for organizing the whole thing.

But the very heart of the Industry is SOCIALISM.

 

[NightFox]

It's interesting how far the socialist movement has come in the US in such a short time. .

Very true, and it's clear that more and more people are open to discussing it, defending it, and even promoting it. So why is that? I think the Right has had a significant hand in this. It could be argued that constantly screaming "socialism" every time a government program is mentioned has made many people think, "well, I think that program is okay, and they're calling it socialism, so maybe socialism is okay too."

Not to mention that many have noticed the hypocrisy of "say 'NO' to socialism, but don't touch my Medicare".

================

Republicans love Private Enterprise and hate Socialism and they adore Insurance Companies.

They don't realize that Insurance is a Socialistic endeavor.

Money is collected from many and disbursed to the few who need it.

The very definition of Socialism.

And the companies get a profit on top for organizing the whole thing.

But the very heart of the Industry is SOCIALISM.

Apparently in your plane of existence socialism has a completely different meaning than it does in the one that the rest of humanity occupies.

Please explain how insurance is an example of public ownership and control of the means of production.

 

[Arizona Willie]

It's interesting how far the socialist movement has come in the US in such a short time. .

Very true, and it's clear that more and more people are open to discussing it, defending it, and even promoting it. So why is that? I think the Right has had a significant hand in this. It could be argued that constantly screaming "socialism" every time a government program is mentioned has made many people think, "well, I think that program is okay, and they're calling it socialism, so maybe socialism is okay too."

Not to mention that many have noticed the hypocrisy of "say 'NO' to socialism, but don't touch my Medicare".

================

Republicans love Private Enterprise and hate Socialism and they adore Insurance Companies.

They don't realize that Insurance is a Socialistic endeavor.

Money is collected from many and disbursed to the few who need it.

The very definition of Socialism.

And the companies get a profit on top for organizing the whole thing.

But the very heart of the Industry is SOCIALISM.

Apparently in your plane of existence socialism has a completely different meaning than it does in the one that the rest of humanity occupies.

Please explain how insurance is an example of public ownership and control of the means of production.

====
Like so many wrong headed right wingers you have mixed up " socialism " and " communism ".

 

[NightFox]

====
Like so many wrong headed right wingers you have mixed up " socialism " and " communism ".

LOL, apparently so did those "wrong headed right wingers" Marx and Engels .... perhaps you should peruse their work before you make an even bigger ass of yourself.

Once you're done with your homework assignment you can come back and explain how the concept of insurance equates with socialism, if you work real hard you might even have an inkling of what communism is by then, mmmkkkaaayyy

 

[imawhosure]

It's interesting how far the socialist movement has come in the US in such a short time. .

Very true, and it's clear that more and more people are open to discussing it, defending it, and even promoting it. So why is that? I think the Right has had a significant hand in this. It could be argued that constantly screaming "socialism" every time a government program is mentioned has made many people think, "well, I think that program is okay, and they're calling it socialism, so maybe socialism is okay too."

Not to mention that many have noticed the hypocrisy of "say 'NO' to socialism, but don't touch my Medicare".

================

Republicans love Private Enterprise and hate Socialism and they adore Insurance Companies.

They don't realize that Insurance is a Socialistic endeavor.

Money is collected from many and disbursed to the few who need it.

The very definition of Socialism.

And the companies get a profit on top for organizing the whole thing.

But the very heart of the Industry is SOCIALISM.

Arizona Willy is a phony baloney! The difference between what he says is true and what is actually happening is PROFIT!

Who here gets into anything to lose money, raise your right wing, or left wing hands.

I am counting, oh my, I don't see any!

What fuels social acceptance, is PROFIT! If I create a drug that cures all cancers and costs 15.00 bucks a pill, yay for all of us. But what if I create a pill that cures all cancers, and it cost me 20 billion to do it? Are you going to pay? Why should I create it if you are not?

Are you going to ask the person dying, or are you going to ask the person who thinks it is UNFAIR? And, what if the person dying does not have the money to supply themselves with the drug?

I suppose I should ask this question--------------> do we actually believe that people come up with solutions to problems because someone asks for it? Or rather, people come to solutions because of profit? Ask Bill Gates? Don't like him, how about George, Washington, Carver. Aren't happy with any of those? What say you about those who devised the atom bomb? Aren't happy with all of that? Maybe your forte is autos! That evil guy Ford. Railroads anyone?

Profit has given America the life she lives, and everyone still steals her secrets. Why?

This should explain everything, to all of you, and Socialism is fine as long as you steal the tech and ideas from others. Without America, where is the tech coming from for the next cancer drug? Without America, the world stands in place. If you are happy today, then 25 years from now, you will still be happy, because without America and her for profit motive, little advances.

Sooooooooooooo, if you want to STOP advancement, then by all means, become Socialists. On the other hand, if you want advancement, then throw these SOCIALISTS under the bus! They are phonies, and if you are to young to remember, Google the USSR. If Socialism was the way to go, we would have done it. What happened is..........YOUR country (the USA) made them look like a bunch of incompetents, and put them out of business.

Want failed policies throughout history? Listen to Bernie and Hillary. That is all you need know, and if you look it up, it will give you the education you should have gotten in college!

 

[HenryBHough]

Elect Nutty Old Uncle Bernie and you'll LOVE living in Soviet style concrete high-rise equal housing.

Because, if you don't, then for you it's The Gulag!

But I think that would be fun to watch, so GO BERNIE!

 

[LogikAndReazon]

A "democratic" communist LOSER............

 

[the_human_being]

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Nice guy, but a bit of a loon.

 

[g5000]

The socialist wants you to focus on the person who receives a government gift. He does not want you to see the theft he had to commit to provide that gift.

When forced to talk about the theft, the socialist portrays the robbed person as an evildoer who deserved to be robbed.

That's Bernie Sanders.

 

[Rustic]

Who here agrees with this quote from Bernie?

"The incident only hardened Sanders' skepticism of corporate power. Television, Sanders wrote in 1979, was a particularly pernicious evil, rooted in "the well-tested Hitlerian principle that people should be treated as morons and bombarded over and over again with the same simple phrases and ideas." Television stations were "attempting to brainwash people into submission and helplessness"

Is corporate America equivalent to Nazism? Could they be purified by having government take them over?

 

[DGS49]

Insurance is VOLUNTARY, you nitwit. "Single Payer" is, by necessity, COMPULSORY. Are you old enough to remember that under Hillary-care, doctors who worked out of the system could be prosecuted as felons?