Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

We don't need another Texas wingnut in the oval office. Especially a religious wingnut that doesn't understand logic or science.

link

So, would you prefer a Chicago thug for a second term? Especially a communist organizer thug that does not understand that eventually all socialists will run out of other people's money?

  • Replies 376
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Especially a communist organizer thug that does not understand that eventually all socialists will run out of other people's money?

That kind of bumper-sticker take on politics is more of a problem than anything, in my view.

Obama taxes us less than Reagan did, and yet we still have these dumb accusations. It would be great to have a dialogue about what kind of country the US wants to have: if they want to cut taxes then fine, if they want to raise taxes then fine.

But there is a real problem with people who proudly shout slogans that they should really be embarrassed about.

Posted (edited)

That kind of bumper-sticker take on politics is more of a problem than anything, in my view.

But there is a real problem with people who proudly shout slogans that they should really be embarrassed about.

American politics is chock full of people who chant bumper sticker slogans. "Hope and Change" was one of them. And the people ate it up. They love slogans without substance!

Edited by GostHacked

Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser

ohm on soundcloud.com

Posted

That kind of bumper-sticker take on politics is more of a problem than anything, in my view.

Obama taxes us less than Reagan did, and yet we still have these dumb accusations.

Tax rates might be less, but spending is a heck of a lot higher. All bought on credit. Someone is going to be paying for that spending sooner or later.

Posted

That kind of bumper-sticker take on politics is more of a problem than anything, in my view.

Obama taxes us less than Reagan did, and yet we still have these dumb accusations. It would be great to have a dialogue about what kind of country the US wants to have: if they want to cut taxes then fine, if they want to raise taxes then fine.

But there is a real problem with people who proudly shout slogans that they should really be embarrassed about.

What 0bama spending is not all tax money, whether the tax rate is lower or higher than under Reagan. He is borrowing from hostile countries and spends that borrowed money like drunken sailor.

That 0bama is a socialist (a failed one even at being a socialist, according to Bernie Sanders) can not be denied. Neither can the fact that he doubled the debt he inherited from Bush spending borrowed Chinese money. If the Chinese won't run out of money, they have shown already that they about running out of patience and willingness to lend.

Posted

Tax rates might be less, but spending is a heck of a lot higher. All bought on credit. Someone is going to be paying for that spending sooner or later.

There's a recession on, though, and a couple of wars too. Factor those things into it. But I'm not defending the economic policies of the US government, I'd just like to have people debate things as they are, not as they'd like them to be.

Posted

Certain things have definitions, though, even if they're broad definitions.

Obama isn't a Communist any more than he is a caterpillar.

He is as much a POTUS as he is a communist, and I agree, he is no communist.

Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser

ohm on soundcloud.com

Posted

I'm denying it and pretty much anybody who knows was socialism is would deny it too.

I'm not sure who you think you're going to convince on here by overstating your case.

He is a corporate socialist.

Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser

ohm on soundcloud.com

Posted (edited)

Texas wingnut is apt.

Chicago thug is questionable but at least you can debate that.

But it makes as much sense to call Obama a communist as it does to call Bush or Perry one.

You can tell a bird by its feathers and you can tell a man by his friends.

0bama has a whole slew of communist friends, advisors and associates. Safe guess that more than Bush or Perry.

0bama's thug friends: Richard Trumka, Leo Gerard, Tony Rezko.

0bama's communist friends: Van Jones, Valeriy Jarrett, Bill Ayers.

Edited by Yukon Jack
Posted

From Wiki:

"Socialism ... is an economic system in which the means of production are publicly or commonly owned and controlled cooperatively, or a political philosophy advocating such a system."

Sounds like Corporate Socialism to me!!

Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser

ohm on soundcloud.com

Posted

I'm denying it and pretty much anybody who knows was socialism is would deny it too.

I'm not sure who you think you're going to convince on here by overstating your case.

0bama is an American. According to the American magazine NEWSWEEK's cover November, 2008, "WE ARE ALL SOCIALISTS NOW!".

Maybe Newsweek was overstating it???

Guest Derek L
Posted

Obama isn’t a communist, nor a true socialist, most Commies and socialists have (flawed) plans with regards to governing and control of the economy………Obama has neither.

Posted

There is no movement towards public ownership of production in the US, so you are wrong.

You've missed the 'too-big-to-fail' bank bailouts and where the US government even owns a nice chunk of GM though stocks. If you use public money (but borrowing from the private institution that is the Federal Reserve). to shore up private entities, and if the goverment is publicly owned, then yes .. it is public ownership. However the american people won't ever benefit (aside from the select few) from it.

Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser

ohm on soundcloud.com

Posted

You've missed the 'too-big-to-fail' bank bailouts and where the US government even owns a nice chunk of GM though stocks. If you use public money (but borrowing from the private institution that is the Federal Reserve). to shore up private entities, and if the goverment is publicly owned, then yes .. it is public ownership. However the american people won't ever benefit (aside from the select few) from it.

A bailout is a temporary response to an emergency, not the same as a concerted plan to take over companies. George W. Bush did them too, and didn't Reagan help bail out Chrysler in the 1980s.

In any case, I know that people just like spewing silly things that makes them puff their chests out and I think this is the real reason behind this. After all, there are plenty of things I'm sure you would LOVE to call Obama, but can't because this is a polite web board.

Posted

That's just wishful slander. I do appreciate you posting this, though, as I will now remember you in the future as the person who thinks that the US is under Communist leadership.

Also, try to remember that the great Democratic idol, FDR's solution for the Great Depression was modeled on his favorite Uncle Joe Stalin's Five Year Plan.

Posted

Wrong again - February 2009. It was a play on words, which wasn't targeted at your, uh, "demographic".

If I was wrong about the date of the publication, my apologies.

Play on words?

It was certainly not targeted at my 'demographics' (whatever the heck you mean by that) because play on words or not, the idiocy of that cover could only sway those who were already hopelessly misguided.

Posted

A bailout is a temporary response to an emergency, not the same as a concerted plan to take over companies. George W. Bush did them too, and didn't Reagan help bail out Chrysler in the 1980s.

I don't agree with bailouts. No matter how far back you go. If companies can't get their stuff together, why should they be bailed out? The average person does not get bailed out by the government when they get themselves into this kind of trouble.

In any case, I know that people just like spewing silly things that makes them puff their chests out and I think this is the real reason behind this.

Wow if you think I spew, hate to know what you think of other posters on this board.

After all, there are plenty of things I'm sure you would LOVE to call Obama, but can't because this is a polite web board.

That sounds a bit trollish there Mike, hardly becoming of a 'facilitator'. If I took that bait I might get banned again. However I can call Obama many things, two of which are puppet and failure.

Google : Webster Griffin Tarpley, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser

ohm on soundcloud.com

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,857
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Tony Eveland
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...