kallend 1,623 #26 October 18, 2008 Quote QuoteQuoteQuote>when he let the dem's stop him from preventing this economic colapse . . . Bush proposed the socialized banking scheme that is supposed to save the banks. Quotewhich most of us oposed and both McCain and Obama voted for. i didn't like any version of the bailout. my feelings were to let it ride and those companies that failed should have been bought by the ones that did things right. UNFORTUNATELY, thanks to the examples set by Reagan and Bush, we have an economy whose foundation is a mountain of debt. That in turn means that TRUST is required to get the necessary credit to invest in any business. The obscure investment instruments and derivatives invented by the Wall St. Whiz Kids eventually made it unclear which institutions could be trusted to pay back any loans, and the trickle down effect killed the economy. Much as I also dislike bailing out the Wall St. Whiz Kids, doing nothing would have been far far worse as the economy would be completely paralyzed from top to bottom, right down to the level of small businesses like yours. Sometimes the medicine tastes vile, but you have to take it anyway. so you are saying bush did the right thing? . I suspect Bush had very little to do with it. It's "The Paulson Plan".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #27 October 18, 2008 QuoteQuote QuoteQuoteQuote>when he let the dem's stop him from preventing this economic colapse . . . Bush proposed the socialized banking scheme that is supposed to save the banks. Quotewhich most of us oposed and both McCain and Obama voted for. i didn't like any version of the bailout. my feelings were to let it ride and those companies that failed should have been bought by the ones that did things right. UNFORTUNATELY, thanks to the examples set by Reagan and Bush, we have an economy whose foundation is a mountain of debt. That in turn means that TRUST is required to get the necessary credit to invest in any business. The obscure investment instruments and derivatives invented by the Wall St. Whiz Kids eventually made it unclear which institutions could be trusted to pay back any loans, and the trickle down effect killed the economy. Much as I also dislike bailing out the Wall St. Whiz Kids, doing nothing would have been far far worse as the economy would be completely paralyzed from top to bottom, right down to the level of small businesses like yours. Sometimes the medicine tastes vile, but you have to take it anyway. so you are saying bush did the right thing? . I suspect Bush had very little to do with it. It's "The Paulson Plan". so a republican put together the plan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #28 October 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote QuoteQuoteQuote>when he let the dem's stop him from preventing this economic colapse . . . Bush proposed the socialized banking scheme that is supposed to save the banks. Quotewhich most of us oposed and both McCain and Obama voted for. i didn't like any version of the bailout. my feelings were to let it ride and those companies that failed should have been bought by the ones that did things right. UNFORTUNATELY, thanks to the examples set by Reagan and Bush, we have an economy whose foundation is a mountain of debt. That in turn means that TRUST is required to get the necessary credit to invest in any business. The obscure investment instruments and derivatives invented by the Wall St. Whiz Kids eventually made it unclear which institutions could be trusted to pay back any loans, and the trickle down effect killed the economy. Much as I also dislike bailing out the Wall St. Whiz Kids, doing nothing would have been far far worse as the economy would be completely paralyzed from top to bottom, right down to the level of small businesses like yours. Sometimes the medicine tastes vile, but you have to take it anyway. so you are saying bush did the right thing? . I suspect Bush had very little to do with it. It's "The Paulson Plan". so a republican put together the plan Funny, don't you think, that the House Republicans voted overwhelmingly against it until a load of sweeteners (aka pork) was added.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites colkikinit 0 #29 October 19, 2008 Funny how in the last 40 years there have only been 2 Democratic Presidents, and during that time republicans have had control of congress for 10 of the last 12 years and 6 of those they have had control of the WH, Senate, and Congress. But still the democrats have turned this country into a socialist society?? Whenever I talk about the good things that happened during the Clinton years I hear "thats because of Newty and the Republicans writing the policy" But those same people claim that the deregulation that caused all of these problems was ALL Clintons fault, so which is it?? Wasnt it Phil Graham and Mccain writing that policy?? But I guess since it was signed by Clinton its totally his fault. Its patently adsurd. What I would like (for once) is for the Republicans to take some responsibility, OWN IT, this your mess!! Even if you didnt start some of the problems you were in total control of all three houses for 6 years, you managed to chip away at the constitution at will and manipulate the world makets as you saw fit to benefit your lobbiest buddies. But when it comes to averting any of disasters that we are in you just point fingers at a president that was in charge 10 years ago?? Oh and remember he had a repubilican House and Senate to contend with, and no they werent making it easy on him. What about the mountain of debt inherited by Clinton?? He turned it into a surplus. What about the Surplus inherited by Bush?? He turned it into a mountain of debt. What will you say when Obama turns the economy around again? Wait its another Tech boom right?? Excuses and rhetoric, its all you got but nobody is buying this time. Extremists, like you Mike, will always have these views and its cool you have the right, but when YOUR guys and YOUR policies get us into a financial and social mess dont get all bent out of shape when the middle 60% of the country backlashes because theyve had enough. Financially we have yet to hit bottom and a new direction is whats in order. We tried it your way, IT WAS A TOTAL FAILURE ON ALL LEVELS!!! You only have yourself to blame. Own it!!take a deep breath, relax and don't clinch your teeth together, it will all be over in a couple of minutes... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kbordson 8 #30 October 19, 2008 So.... curious question here And since the pm was in reply to this thread, I thought I would pose the question here (especially since that person isn't accepting pm's ... he just sends them) Is a personal attack in a cowardly pm still a personal attack? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MikeForsythe 0 #31 October 19, 2008 QuoteExtremists, like you MikeSince I have neither agreed or disagreed with the link tell me how this makes me an extremist? By the way, the last election that I voted in I voted for Gore, explain that one.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #32 October 19, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Yeah I figured shit would be flung in your direction. Uh this whole thread and the premise and link it is based on is Just more monkey poo flinigin.. and the OP was tossin it at all of us. Honestly. Do you read how that sounds? You can disagree with Mike. But your disrespect that you show to him as a person is sad. Get used to it. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #33 October 19, 2008 >>>>>>>>>>>>>One of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. Yes we do, as the only industrialized nation to not have socialized med, as well as the richest country by far....yes we do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #34 October 19, 2008 Quote Maybe Socialism will be the best thing that could happen to America. Yea, it seems Capitalism is working so well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #35 October 20, 2008 QuoteOne of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. What...? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #36 October 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteOne of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. What...? Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #37 October 20, 2008 Quote Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Choosing Obama over McCain because you don't want more socialism is hard to figure out, yes. Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,396 #38 October 20, 2008 >Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? Bush has done more to bring us closer to socialism than any president in recent memory. I listed a few examples. McCain will follow in his footsteps based on his voting record. (Yes, I know he claims that he won't. But I tend to believe what people do rather than what they say.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites grimmie 173 #39 October 20, 2008 McCain would love to put everyone currently in a private or state pension plan onto the Social Security dole. His past motives make little sense, except to use the pension money for government spending. Here is a guy getting a military pension and soon a congressional pension, but he wants to screw all of the other workers out of theirs. He aligned himself with Arnold here (CA) in 2005 on the pension issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #40 October 20, 2008 QuoteQuote Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Choosing Obama over McCain because you don't want more socialism is hard to figure out, yes. Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. Really? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. It may not be the minority welfare mom based socilism the RW likes ot disply, but it could be argued that it is collectivist for the military, for the greater goood, etc. That is, unless you think like me that a huge military that spends 8 times that of #2 unneccessary. The actual definition of Socialims is where the means of production is controlled by the people, versus by the government in Communism or by the elite in Capitalism. Since corprorations benefit the most with M.I.C., I would say that renders gross over-spending by the military more of corporatist fascism than Socialism, but it basically has components of both. Try not to oversimplify Socialism is that pregnant Mexican illegal with 5 kids running around her, it is simply RW rhetoric to scare people into voting Republican and outright dishonest. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Well, like the war, if anyone didn't vote for goping, they were a terrorist, so until the D's are firmly in control will we see what they can/will do, as with Clinton. We saw what he did with the fiscal nature of the US and what this POS did after, so I would like to roll back to that. >>>>>>>>>>>Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? I just think they are different Socialists, McCain is Socialist in that he wants to cut taxes and spend money to be earned somewhere in the 22nd century, Obama wants to be Socialist and distribute wealth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,396 #41 October 20, 2008 >Bad choice unless this country wants socialism and a hugh increase in welfare. Good commentary from Powell on the latest Obama smears: And now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying less, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #42 October 20, 2008 QuoteActually The Post-American World is probably a book we should all read and has nothing to do with islam. Why? (should we all read it?) Curious as to your reasons. (Disclosure: I haven't read the book but have heard the author speak and am familiar with his arguments.) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #43 October 20, 2008 Quote>Bad choice unless this country wants socialism and a hugh increase in welfare. Good commentary from Powell on the latest Obama smears: And now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying less, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate. Obama wants to raise taxes on some to give directly to others, and that is socialism and welfare and that is wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #44 October 20, 2008 QuoteAnd now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Obama was endorsed by the New Party as well as the Democratic Socialists of America in 1996. "Spread the wealth"Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites flyfast1966 0 #45 October 20, 2008 Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #46 October 20, 2008 Quote>Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? But I tend to believe what people do rather than what they say.) So why then are you voting for Obama? What has he ever done, excluding all the talk, to make you think he'll be a good president? It's a circular argument. If you claim not to listen to what people say but what they do, then it's back to the experience problem for Obama. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #47 October 20, 2008 Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites flyfast1966 0 #48 October 20, 2008 Quote Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such. I didn't say senators. Everybody that follows politics knows that Mccain is for the rich, He didn't even know how many houses he owned, LOL. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #49 October 20, 2008 Quote Really? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. It may not be the minority welfare mom based socilism the RW likes ot disply, but it could be argued that it is collectivist for the military, for the greater goood, etc. That is, unless you think like me that a huge military that spends 8 times that of #2 unneccessary. Right, ignore the actual welfare and government programs. Ignore the nationalized health care plan. Ignore tax hikes for anyone above middle class. Those are all made up by my mom and the neo-cons. We've had the military spending argument several times. As a function of GDP, the US is around #37. If you think that's too much then fine. Over spending in the military does not equate to socialism. QuoteThe actual definition of Socialims is where the means of production is controlled by the people, versus by the government in Communism or by the elite in Capitalism. Since corprorations benefit the most with M.I.C., I would say that renders gross over-spending by the military more of corporatist fascism than Socialism, but it basically has components of both. Try not to oversimplify Socialism is that pregnant Mexican illegal with 5 kids running around her, it is simply RW rhetoric to scare people into voting Republican and outright dishonest. Wow. Talk about oversimplifying. I'd really like know what you think a corporation is made of. You paint a picture of the Monopoly guy bouncing around a penthouse smoking a pipe. When a company like Boeing gets a government contract it employs thousands of people. There have to be people on the assembly line putting the shit together. In order to eliminate government contracts to civilian compaies, the military would have to produce all of their own equipment. That would mean, gasp, drastically increasing the size of the military. And the pregnant Mexican with 5 kids you speak of is in fact a drag on the economy... assuming she's drawing welfare, sending her kids to public school, and soon to be enrolled in free healthcare. Quote Well, like the war, if anyone didn't vote for goping, they were a terrorist, so until the D's are firmly in control will we see what they can/will do, as with Clinton. We saw what he did with the fiscal nature of the US and what this POS did after, so I would like to roll back to that. So Obama's voting record is the fault of republicans. He was guilted into voting that way by the GOP. Great. Spine of jellow. The D's have an approval rating roughly half of Bush's. I too am anxious (ie. nervous) to see what will happen when they're in total control. QuoteI just think they are different Socialists, McCain is Socialist in that he wants to cut taxes and spend money to be earned somewhere in the 22nd century, Obama wants to be Socialist and distribute wealth. McCain wants to cut taxes and cut spending. Obama wants to shift taxes to anyone above middle-class and increase spending. He doesn't want to distribute wealth. He wants to redistribute. Big difference. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #50 October 20, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such. I didn't say senators. Everybody that follows politics knows that Mccain is for the rich, He didn't even know how many houses he owned, LOL. Sounds like you've already got all the blue Kool-Aid you can handle, but I'll see if I make it a little more purple. Houses - since the houses were bought as investments (which his wife handles), why would he necessarily know? What is your opinion of Warren Buffets' wife not knowing what stock positions he holds? As for the "McCain is for the rich" comment, here's a primer for you - a lower tax rate equates to MORE people who are off the tax rolls. Explain how letting the Bush tax cuts expire (which is what the Dems have already said they will do) is going to help the middle class.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 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. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
marks2065 0 #27 October 18, 2008 QuoteQuote QuoteQuoteQuote>when he let the dem's stop him from preventing this economic colapse . . . Bush proposed the socialized banking scheme that is supposed to save the banks. Quotewhich most of us oposed and both McCain and Obama voted for. i didn't like any version of the bailout. my feelings were to let it ride and those companies that failed should have been bought by the ones that did things right. UNFORTUNATELY, thanks to the examples set by Reagan and Bush, we have an economy whose foundation is a mountain of debt. That in turn means that TRUST is required to get the necessary credit to invest in any business. The obscure investment instruments and derivatives invented by the Wall St. Whiz Kids eventually made it unclear which institutions could be trusted to pay back any loans, and the trickle down effect killed the economy. Much as I also dislike bailing out the Wall St. Whiz Kids, doing nothing would have been far far worse as the economy would be completely paralyzed from top to bottom, right down to the level of small businesses like yours. Sometimes the medicine tastes vile, but you have to take it anyway. so you are saying bush did the right thing? . I suspect Bush had very little to do with it. It's "The Paulson Plan". so a republican put together the plan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #28 October 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote QuoteQuoteQuote>when he let the dem's stop him from preventing this economic colapse . . . Bush proposed the socialized banking scheme that is supposed to save the banks. Quotewhich most of us oposed and both McCain and Obama voted for. i didn't like any version of the bailout. my feelings were to let it ride and those companies that failed should have been bought by the ones that did things right. UNFORTUNATELY, thanks to the examples set by Reagan and Bush, we have an economy whose foundation is a mountain of debt. That in turn means that TRUST is required to get the necessary credit to invest in any business. The obscure investment instruments and derivatives invented by the Wall St. Whiz Kids eventually made it unclear which institutions could be trusted to pay back any loans, and the trickle down effect killed the economy. Much as I also dislike bailing out the Wall St. Whiz Kids, doing nothing would have been far far worse as the economy would be completely paralyzed from top to bottom, right down to the level of small businesses like yours. Sometimes the medicine tastes vile, but you have to take it anyway. so you are saying bush did the right thing? . I suspect Bush had very little to do with it. It's "The Paulson Plan". so a republican put together the plan Funny, don't you think, that the House Republicans voted overwhelmingly against it until a load of sweeteners (aka pork) was added.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites colkikinit 0 #29 October 19, 2008 Funny how in the last 40 years there have only been 2 Democratic Presidents, and during that time republicans have had control of congress for 10 of the last 12 years and 6 of those they have had control of the WH, Senate, and Congress. But still the democrats have turned this country into a socialist society?? Whenever I talk about the good things that happened during the Clinton years I hear "thats because of Newty and the Republicans writing the policy" But those same people claim that the deregulation that caused all of these problems was ALL Clintons fault, so which is it?? Wasnt it Phil Graham and Mccain writing that policy?? But I guess since it was signed by Clinton its totally his fault. Its patently adsurd. What I would like (for once) is for the Republicans to take some responsibility, OWN IT, this your mess!! Even if you didnt start some of the problems you were in total control of all three houses for 6 years, you managed to chip away at the constitution at will and manipulate the world makets as you saw fit to benefit your lobbiest buddies. But when it comes to averting any of disasters that we are in you just point fingers at a president that was in charge 10 years ago?? Oh and remember he had a repubilican House and Senate to contend with, and no they werent making it easy on him. What about the mountain of debt inherited by Clinton?? He turned it into a surplus. What about the Surplus inherited by Bush?? He turned it into a mountain of debt. What will you say when Obama turns the economy around again? Wait its another Tech boom right?? Excuses and rhetoric, its all you got but nobody is buying this time. Extremists, like you Mike, will always have these views and its cool you have the right, but when YOUR guys and YOUR policies get us into a financial and social mess dont get all bent out of shape when the middle 60% of the country backlashes because theyve had enough. Financially we have yet to hit bottom and a new direction is whats in order. We tried it your way, IT WAS A TOTAL FAILURE ON ALL LEVELS!!! You only have yourself to blame. Own it!!take a deep breath, relax and don't clinch your teeth together, it will all be over in a couple of minutes... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kbordson 8 #30 October 19, 2008 So.... curious question here And since the pm was in reply to this thread, I thought I would pose the question here (especially since that person isn't accepting pm's ... he just sends them) Is a personal attack in a cowardly pm still a personal attack? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MikeForsythe 0 #31 October 19, 2008 QuoteExtremists, like you MikeSince I have neither agreed or disagreed with the link tell me how this makes me an extremist? By the way, the last election that I voted in I voted for Gore, explain that one.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #32 October 19, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Yeah I figured shit would be flung in your direction. Uh this whole thread and the premise and link it is based on is Just more monkey poo flinigin.. and the OP was tossin it at all of us. Honestly. Do you read how that sounds? You can disagree with Mike. But your disrespect that you show to him as a person is sad. Get used to it. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #33 October 19, 2008 >>>>>>>>>>>>>One of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. Yes we do, as the only industrialized nation to not have socialized med, as well as the richest country by far....yes we do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #34 October 19, 2008 Quote Maybe Socialism will be the best thing that could happen to America. Yea, it seems Capitalism is working so well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #35 October 20, 2008 QuoteOne of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. What...? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #36 October 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteOne of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. What...? Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #37 October 20, 2008 Quote Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Choosing Obama over McCain because you don't want more socialism is hard to figure out, yes. Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,396 #38 October 20, 2008 >Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? Bush has done more to bring us closer to socialism than any president in recent memory. I listed a few examples. McCain will follow in his footsteps based on his voting record. (Yes, I know he claims that he won't. But I tend to believe what people do rather than what they say.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites grimmie 173 #39 October 20, 2008 McCain would love to put everyone currently in a private or state pension plan onto the Social Security dole. His past motives make little sense, except to use the pension money for government spending. Here is a guy getting a military pension and soon a congressional pension, but he wants to screw all of the other workers out of theirs. He aligned himself with Arnold here (CA) in 2005 on the pension issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #40 October 20, 2008 QuoteQuote Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Choosing Obama over McCain because you don't want more socialism is hard to figure out, yes. Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. Really? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. It may not be the minority welfare mom based socilism the RW likes ot disply, but it could be argued that it is collectivist for the military, for the greater goood, etc. That is, unless you think like me that a huge military that spends 8 times that of #2 unneccessary. The actual definition of Socialims is where the means of production is controlled by the people, versus by the government in Communism or by the elite in Capitalism. Since corprorations benefit the most with M.I.C., I would say that renders gross over-spending by the military more of corporatist fascism than Socialism, but it basically has components of both. Try not to oversimplify Socialism is that pregnant Mexican illegal with 5 kids running around her, it is simply RW rhetoric to scare people into voting Republican and outright dishonest. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Well, like the war, if anyone didn't vote for goping, they were a terrorist, so until the D's are firmly in control will we see what they can/will do, as with Clinton. We saw what he did with the fiscal nature of the US and what this POS did after, so I would like to roll back to that. >>>>>>>>>>>Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? I just think they are different Socialists, McCain is Socialist in that he wants to cut taxes and spend money to be earned somewhere in the 22nd century, Obama wants to be Socialist and distribute wealth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,396 #41 October 20, 2008 >Bad choice unless this country wants socialism and a hugh increase in welfare. Good commentary from Powell on the latest Obama smears: And now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying less, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #42 October 20, 2008 QuoteActually The Post-American World is probably a book we should all read and has nothing to do with islam. Why? (should we all read it?) Curious as to your reasons. (Disclosure: I haven't read the book but have heard the author speak and am familiar with his arguments.) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #43 October 20, 2008 Quote>Bad choice unless this country wants socialism and a hugh increase in welfare. Good commentary from Powell on the latest Obama smears: And now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying less, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate. Obama wants to raise taxes on some to give directly to others, and that is socialism and welfare and that is wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #44 October 20, 2008 QuoteAnd now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Obama was endorsed by the New Party as well as the Democratic Socialists of America in 1996. "Spread the wealth"Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites flyfast1966 0 #45 October 20, 2008 Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #46 October 20, 2008 Quote>Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? But I tend to believe what people do rather than what they say.) So why then are you voting for Obama? What has he ever done, excluding all the talk, to make you think he'll be a good president? It's a circular argument. If you claim not to listen to what people say but what they do, then it's back to the experience problem for Obama. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #47 October 20, 2008 Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites flyfast1966 0 #48 October 20, 2008 Quote Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such. I didn't say senators. Everybody that follows politics knows that Mccain is for the rich, He didn't even know how many houses he owned, LOL. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #49 October 20, 2008 Quote Really? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. It may not be the minority welfare mom based socilism the RW likes ot disply, but it could be argued that it is collectivist for the military, for the greater goood, etc. That is, unless you think like me that a huge military that spends 8 times that of #2 unneccessary. Right, ignore the actual welfare and government programs. Ignore the nationalized health care plan. Ignore tax hikes for anyone above middle class. Those are all made up by my mom and the neo-cons. We've had the military spending argument several times. As a function of GDP, the US is around #37. If you think that's too much then fine. Over spending in the military does not equate to socialism. QuoteThe actual definition of Socialims is where the means of production is controlled by the people, versus by the government in Communism or by the elite in Capitalism. Since corprorations benefit the most with M.I.C., I would say that renders gross over-spending by the military more of corporatist fascism than Socialism, but it basically has components of both. Try not to oversimplify Socialism is that pregnant Mexican illegal with 5 kids running around her, it is simply RW rhetoric to scare people into voting Republican and outright dishonest. Wow. Talk about oversimplifying. I'd really like know what you think a corporation is made of. You paint a picture of the Monopoly guy bouncing around a penthouse smoking a pipe. When a company like Boeing gets a government contract it employs thousands of people. There have to be people on the assembly line putting the shit together. In order to eliminate government contracts to civilian compaies, the military would have to produce all of their own equipment. That would mean, gasp, drastically increasing the size of the military. And the pregnant Mexican with 5 kids you speak of is in fact a drag on the economy... assuming she's drawing welfare, sending her kids to public school, and soon to be enrolled in free healthcare. Quote Well, like the war, if anyone didn't vote for goping, they were a terrorist, so until the D's are firmly in control will we see what they can/will do, as with Clinton. We saw what he did with the fiscal nature of the US and what this POS did after, so I would like to roll back to that. So Obama's voting record is the fault of republicans. He was guilted into voting that way by the GOP. Great. Spine of jellow. The D's have an approval rating roughly half of Bush's. I too am anxious (ie. nervous) to see what will happen when they're in total control. QuoteI just think they are different Socialists, McCain is Socialist in that he wants to cut taxes and spend money to be earned somewhere in the 22nd century, Obama wants to be Socialist and distribute wealth. McCain wants to cut taxes and cut spending. Obama wants to shift taxes to anyone above middle-class and increase spending. He doesn't want to distribute wealth. He wants to redistribute. Big difference. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #50 October 20, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such. I didn't say senators. Everybody that follows politics knows that Mccain is for the rich, He didn't even know how many houses he owned, LOL. Sounds like you've already got all the blue Kool-Aid you can handle, but I'll see if I make it a little more purple. Houses - since the houses were bought as investments (which his wife handles), why would he necessarily know? What is your opinion of Warren Buffets' wife not knowing what stock positions he holds? As for the "McCain is for the rich" comment, here's a primer for you - a lower tax rate equates to MORE people who are off the tax rolls. Explain how letting the Bush tax cuts expire (which is what the Dems have already said they will do) is going to help the middle class.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 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. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
kallend 1,623 #28 October 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote QuoteQuoteQuote>when he let the dem's stop him from preventing this economic colapse . . . Bush proposed the socialized banking scheme that is supposed to save the banks. Quotewhich most of us oposed and both McCain and Obama voted for. i didn't like any version of the bailout. my feelings were to let it ride and those companies that failed should have been bought by the ones that did things right. UNFORTUNATELY, thanks to the examples set by Reagan and Bush, we have an economy whose foundation is a mountain of debt. That in turn means that TRUST is required to get the necessary credit to invest in any business. The obscure investment instruments and derivatives invented by the Wall St. Whiz Kids eventually made it unclear which institutions could be trusted to pay back any loans, and the trickle down effect killed the economy. Much as I also dislike bailing out the Wall St. Whiz Kids, doing nothing would have been far far worse as the economy would be completely paralyzed from top to bottom, right down to the level of small businesses like yours. Sometimes the medicine tastes vile, but you have to take it anyway. so you are saying bush did the right thing? . I suspect Bush had very little to do with it. It's "The Paulson Plan". so a republican put together the plan Funny, don't you think, that the House Republicans voted overwhelmingly against it until a load of sweeteners (aka pork) was added.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites colkikinit 0 #29 October 19, 2008 Funny how in the last 40 years there have only been 2 Democratic Presidents, and during that time republicans have had control of congress for 10 of the last 12 years and 6 of those they have had control of the WH, Senate, and Congress. But still the democrats have turned this country into a socialist society?? Whenever I talk about the good things that happened during the Clinton years I hear "thats because of Newty and the Republicans writing the policy" But those same people claim that the deregulation that caused all of these problems was ALL Clintons fault, so which is it?? Wasnt it Phil Graham and Mccain writing that policy?? But I guess since it was signed by Clinton its totally his fault. Its patently adsurd. What I would like (for once) is for the Republicans to take some responsibility, OWN IT, this your mess!! Even if you didnt start some of the problems you were in total control of all three houses for 6 years, you managed to chip away at the constitution at will and manipulate the world makets as you saw fit to benefit your lobbiest buddies. But when it comes to averting any of disasters that we are in you just point fingers at a president that was in charge 10 years ago?? Oh and remember he had a repubilican House and Senate to contend with, and no they werent making it easy on him. What about the mountain of debt inherited by Clinton?? He turned it into a surplus. What about the Surplus inherited by Bush?? He turned it into a mountain of debt. What will you say when Obama turns the economy around again? Wait its another Tech boom right?? Excuses and rhetoric, its all you got but nobody is buying this time. Extremists, like you Mike, will always have these views and its cool you have the right, but when YOUR guys and YOUR policies get us into a financial and social mess dont get all bent out of shape when the middle 60% of the country backlashes because theyve had enough. Financially we have yet to hit bottom and a new direction is whats in order. We tried it your way, IT WAS A TOTAL FAILURE ON ALL LEVELS!!! You only have yourself to blame. Own it!!take a deep breath, relax and don't clinch your teeth together, it will all be over in a couple of minutes... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kbordson 8 #30 October 19, 2008 So.... curious question here And since the pm was in reply to this thread, I thought I would pose the question here (especially since that person isn't accepting pm's ... he just sends them) Is a personal attack in a cowardly pm still a personal attack? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites MikeForsythe 0 #31 October 19, 2008 QuoteExtremists, like you MikeSince I have neither agreed or disagreed with the link tell me how this makes me an extremist? By the way, the last election that I voted in I voted for Gore, explain that one.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #32 October 19, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Yeah I figured shit would be flung in your direction. Uh this whole thread and the premise and link it is based on is Just more monkey poo flinigin.. and the OP was tossin it at all of us. Honestly. Do you read how that sounds? You can disagree with Mike. But your disrespect that you show to him as a person is sad. Get used to it. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #33 October 19, 2008 >>>>>>>>>>>>>One of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. Yes we do, as the only industrialized nation to not have socialized med, as well as the richest country by far....yes we do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #34 October 19, 2008 Quote Maybe Socialism will be the best thing that could happen to America. Yea, it seems Capitalism is working so well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #35 October 20, 2008 QuoteOne of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. What...? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #36 October 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteOne of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. What...? Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #37 October 20, 2008 Quote Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Choosing Obama over McCain because you don't want more socialism is hard to figure out, yes. Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,396 #38 October 20, 2008 >Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? Bush has done more to bring us closer to socialism than any president in recent memory. I listed a few examples. McCain will follow in his footsteps based on his voting record. (Yes, I know he claims that he won't. But I tend to believe what people do rather than what they say.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites grimmie 173 #39 October 20, 2008 McCain would love to put everyone currently in a private or state pension plan onto the Social Security dole. His past motives make little sense, except to use the pension money for government spending. Here is a guy getting a military pension and soon a congressional pension, but he wants to screw all of the other workers out of theirs. He aligned himself with Arnold here (CA) in 2005 on the pension issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #40 October 20, 2008 QuoteQuote Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Choosing Obama over McCain because you don't want more socialism is hard to figure out, yes. Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. Really? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. It may not be the minority welfare mom based socilism the RW likes ot disply, but it could be argued that it is collectivist for the military, for the greater goood, etc. That is, unless you think like me that a huge military that spends 8 times that of #2 unneccessary. The actual definition of Socialims is where the means of production is controlled by the people, versus by the government in Communism or by the elite in Capitalism. Since corprorations benefit the most with M.I.C., I would say that renders gross over-spending by the military more of corporatist fascism than Socialism, but it basically has components of both. Try not to oversimplify Socialism is that pregnant Mexican illegal with 5 kids running around her, it is simply RW rhetoric to scare people into voting Republican and outright dishonest. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Well, like the war, if anyone didn't vote for goping, they were a terrorist, so until the D's are firmly in control will we see what they can/will do, as with Clinton. We saw what he did with the fiscal nature of the US and what this POS did after, so I would like to roll back to that. >>>>>>>>>>>Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? I just think they are different Socialists, McCain is Socialist in that he wants to cut taxes and spend money to be earned somewhere in the 22nd century, Obama wants to be Socialist and distribute wealth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,396 #41 October 20, 2008 >Bad choice unless this country wants socialism and a hugh increase in welfare. Good commentary from Powell on the latest Obama smears: And now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying less, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nerdgirl 0 #42 October 20, 2008 QuoteActually The Post-American World is probably a book we should all read and has nothing to do with islam. Why? (should we all read it?) Curious as to your reasons. (Disclosure: I haven't read the book but have heard the author speak and am familiar with his arguments.) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #43 October 20, 2008 Quote>Bad choice unless this country wants socialism and a hugh increase in welfare. Good commentary from Powell on the latest Obama smears: And now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying less, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate. Obama wants to raise taxes on some to give directly to others, and that is socialism and welfare and that is wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #44 October 20, 2008 QuoteAnd now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Obama was endorsed by the New Party as well as the Democratic Socialists of America in 1996. "Spread the wealth"Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites flyfast1966 0 #45 October 20, 2008 Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #46 October 20, 2008 Quote>Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? But I tend to believe what people do rather than what they say.) So why then are you voting for Obama? What has he ever done, excluding all the talk, to make you think he'll be a good president? It's a circular argument. If you claim not to listen to what people say but what they do, then it's back to the experience problem for Obama. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #47 October 20, 2008 Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites flyfast1966 0 #48 October 20, 2008 Quote Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such. I didn't say senators. Everybody that follows politics knows that Mccain is for the rich, He didn't even know how many houses he owned, LOL. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FallingOsh 0 #49 October 20, 2008 Quote Really? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. It may not be the minority welfare mom based socilism the RW likes ot disply, but it could be argued that it is collectivist for the military, for the greater goood, etc. That is, unless you think like me that a huge military that spends 8 times that of #2 unneccessary. Right, ignore the actual welfare and government programs. Ignore the nationalized health care plan. Ignore tax hikes for anyone above middle class. Those are all made up by my mom and the neo-cons. We've had the military spending argument several times. As a function of GDP, the US is around #37. If you think that's too much then fine. Over spending in the military does not equate to socialism. QuoteThe actual definition of Socialims is where the means of production is controlled by the people, versus by the government in Communism or by the elite in Capitalism. Since corprorations benefit the most with M.I.C., I would say that renders gross over-spending by the military more of corporatist fascism than Socialism, but it basically has components of both. Try not to oversimplify Socialism is that pregnant Mexican illegal with 5 kids running around her, it is simply RW rhetoric to scare people into voting Republican and outright dishonest. Wow. Talk about oversimplifying. I'd really like know what you think a corporation is made of. You paint a picture of the Monopoly guy bouncing around a penthouse smoking a pipe. When a company like Boeing gets a government contract it employs thousands of people. There have to be people on the assembly line putting the shit together. In order to eliminate government contracts to civilian compaies, the military would have to produce all of their own equipment. That would mean, gasp, drastically increasing the size of the military. And the pregnant Mexican with 5 kids you speak of is in fact a drag on the economy... assuming she's drawing welfare, sending her kids to public school, and soon to be enrolled in free healthcare. Quote Well, like the war, if anyone didn't vote for goping, they were a terrorist, so until the D's are firmly in control will we see what they can/will do, as with Clinton. We saw what he did with the fiscal nature of the US and what this POS did after, so I would like to roll back to that. So Obama's voting record is the fault of republicans. He was guilted into voting that way by the GOP. Great. Spine of jellow. The D's have an approval rating roughly half of Bush's. I too am anxious (ie. nervous) to see what will happen when they're in total control. QuoteI just think they are different Socialists, McCain is Socialist in that he wants to cut taxes and spend money to be earned somewhere in the 22nd century, Obama wants to be Socialist and distribute wealth. McCain wants to cut taxes and cut spending. Obama wants to shift taxes to anyone above middle-class and increase spending. He doesn't want to distribute wealth. He wants to redistribute. Big difference. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #50 October 20, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such. I didn't say senators. Everybody that follows politics knows that Mccain is for the rich, He didn't even know how many houses he owned, LOL. Sounds like you've already got all the blue Kool-Aid you can handle, but I'll see if I make it a little more purple. Houses - since the houses were bought as investments (which his wife handles), why would he necessarily know? What is your opinion of Warren Buffets' wife not knowing what stock positions he holds? As for the "McCain is for the rich" comment, here's a primer for you - a lower tax rate equates to MORE people who are off the tax rolls. Explain how letting the Bush tax cuts expire (which is what the Dems have already said they will do) is going to help the middle class.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 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. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
colkikinit 0 #29 October 19, 2008 Funny how in the last 40 years there have only been 2 Democratic Presidents, and during that time republicans have had control of congress for 10 of the last 12 years and 6 of those they have had control of the WH, Senate, and Congress. But still the democrats have turned this country into a socialist society?? Whenever I talk about the good things that happened during the Clinton years I hear "thats because of Newty and the Republicans writing the policy" But those same people claim that the deregulation that caused all of these problems was ALL Clintons fault, so which is it?? Wasnt it Phil Graham and Mccain writing that policy?? But I guess since it was signed by Clinton its totally his fault. Its patently adsurd. What I would like (for once) is for the Republicans to take some responsibility, OWN IT, this your mess!! Even if you didnt start some of the problems you were in total control of all three houses for 6 years, you managed to chip away at the constitution at will and manipulate the world makets as you saw fit to benefit your lobbiest buddies. But when it comes to averting any of disasters that we are in you just point fingers at a president that was in charge 10 years ago?? Oh and remember he had a repubilican House and Senate to contend with, and no they werent making it easy on him. What about the mountain of debt inherited by Clinton?? He turned it into a surplus. What about the Surplus inherited by Bush?? He turned it into a mountain of debt. What will you say when Obama turns the economy around again? Wait its another Tech boom right?? Excuses and rhetoric, its all you got but nobody is buying this time. Extremists, like you Mike, will always have these views and its cool you have the right, but when YOUR guys and YOUR policies get us into a financial and social mess dont get all bent out of shape when the middle 60% of the country backlashes because theyve had enough. Financially we have yet to hit bottom and a new direction is whats in order. We tried it your way, IT WAS A TOTAL FAILURE ON ALL LEVELS!!! You only have yourself to blame. Own it!!take a deep breath, relax and don't clinch your teeth together, it will all be over in a couple of minutes... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kbordson 8 #30 October 19, 2008 So.... curious question here And since the pm was in reply to this thread, I thought I would pose the question here (especially since that person isn't accepting pm's ... he just sends them) Is a personal attack in a cowardly pm still a personal attack? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MikeForsythe 0 #31 October 19, 2008 QuoteExtremists, like you MikeSince I have neither agreed or disagreed with the link tell me how this makes me an extremist? By the way, the last election that I voted in I voted for Gore, explain that one.Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #32 October 19, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Yeah I figured shit would be flung in your direction. Uh this whole thread and the premise and link it is based on is Just more monkey poo flinigin.. and the OP was tossin it at all of us. Honestly. Do you read how that sounds? You can disagree with Mike. But your disrespect that you show to him as a person is sad. Get used to it. Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #33 October 19, 2008 >>>>>>>>>>>>>One of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. Yes we do, as the only industrialized nation to not have socialized med, as well as the richest country by far....yes we do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #34 October 19, 2008 Quote Maybe Socialism will be the best thing that could happen to America. Yea, it seems Capitalism is working so well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #35 October 20, 2008 QuoteOne of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. What...? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #36 October 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteOne of the reasons I would worry about a McCain presidency; we don't need even more socialism. What...? Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #37 October 20, 2008 Quote Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Choosing Obama over McCain because you don't want more socialism is hard to figure out, yes. Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,396 #38 October 20, 2008 >Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? Bush has done more to bring us closer to socialism than any president in recent memory. I listed a few examples. McCain will follow in his footsteps based on his voting record. (Yes, I know he claims that he won't. But I tend to believe what people do rather than what they say.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 173 #39 October 20, 2008 McCain would love to put everyone currently in a private or state pension plan onto the Social Security dole. His past motives make little sense, except to use the pension money for government spending. Here is a guy getting a military pension and soon a congressional pension, but he wants to screw all of the other workers out of theirs. He aligned himself with Arnold here (CA) in 2005 on the pension issue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #40 October 20, 2008 QuoteQuote Aside from the typical 'throw 100's of billions at the military industrial complex' that righties do so well, essentially corporate social welfare, now they've moved to bailing out the mortgage complex, that is what Bill is talking about. Is that hard to figure by what was posted? Choosing Obama over McCain because you don't want more socialism is hard to figure out, yes. Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Throwing 100s of billions at the military, as you put it, is not socialism. Maybe you think it's wasteful spending, but it's not socialism. Really? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. It may not be the minority welfare mom based socilism the RW likes ot disply, but it could be argued that it is collectivist for the military, for the greater goood, etc. That is, unless you think like me that a huge military that spends 8 times that of #2 unneccessary. The actual definition of Socialims is where the means of production is controlled by the people, versus by the government in Communism or by the elite in Capitalism. Since corprorations benefit the most with M.I.C., I would say that renders gross over-spending by the military more of corporatist fascism than Socialism, but it basically has components of both. Try not to oversimplify Socialism is that pregnant Mexican illegal with 5 kids running around her, it is simply RW rhetoric to scare people into voting Republican and outright dishonest. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The bailout bill was terrible but both McCain and Obama voted in favor so that was a poor example to differentiate the two. Well, like the war, if anyone didn't vote for goping, they were a terrorist, so until the D's are firmly in control will we see what they can/will do, as with Clinton. We saw what he did with the fiscal nature of the US and what this POS did after, so I would like to roll back to that. >>>>>>>>>>>Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? I just think they are different Socialists, McCain is Socialist in that he wants to cut taxes and spend money to be earned somewhere in the 22nd century, Obama wants to be Socialist and distribute wealth. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,396 #41 October 20, 2008 >Bad choice unless this country wants socialism and a hugh increase in welfare. Good commentary from Powell on the latest Obama smears: And now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying less, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #42 October 20, 2008 QuoteActually The Post-American World is probably a book we should all read and has nothing to do with islam. Why? (should we all read it?) Curious as to your reasons. (Disclosure: I haven't read the book but have heard the author speak and am familiar with his arguments.) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #43 October 20, 2008 Quote>Bad choice unless this country wants socialism and a hugh increase in welfare. Good commentary from Powell on the latest Obama smears: And now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have. Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who pay them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there's nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more or who should be paying less, and for us to say that makes you a socialist is an unfortunate characterization that isn't accurate. Obama wants to raise taxes on some to give directly to others, and that is socialism and welfare and that is wrong. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #44 October 20, 2008 QuoteAnd now I guess the message this week is we're going to call him a socialist. Obama was endorsed by the New Party as well as the Democratic Socialists of America in 1996. "Spread the wealth"Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyfast1966 0 #45 October 20, 2008 Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #46 October 20, 2008 Quote>Got anything else to try and prove why McCain is more socialist than Obama? But I tend to believe what people do rather than what they say.) So why then are you voting for Obama? What has he ever done, excluding all the talk, to make you think he'll be a good president? It's a circular argument. If you claim not to listen to what people say but what they do, then it's back to the experience problem for Obama. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #47 October 20, 2008 Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyfast1966 0 #48 October 20, 2008 Quote Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such. I didn't say senators. Everybody that follows politics knows that Mccain is for the rich, He didn't even know how many houses he owned, LOL. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #49 October 20, 2008 Quote Really? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. It may not be the minority welfare mom based socilism the RW likes ot disply, but it could be argued that it is collectivist for the military, for the greater goood, etc. That is, unless you think like me that a huge military that spends 8 times that of #2 unneccessary. Right, ignore the actual welfare and government programs. Ignore the nationalized health care plan. Ignore tax hikes for anyone above middle class. Those are all made up by my mom and the neo-cons. We've had the military spending argument several times. As a function of GDP, the US is around #37. If you think that's too much then fine. Over spending in the military does not equate to socialism. QuoteThe actual definition of Socialims is where the means of production is controlled by the people, versus by the government in Communism or by the elite in Capitalism. Since corprorations benefit the most with M.I.C., I would say that renders gross over-spending by the military more of corporatist fascism than Socialism, but it basically has components of both. Try not to oversimplify Socialism is that pregnant Mexican illegal with 5 kids running around her, it is simply RW rhetoric to scare people into voting Republican and outright dishonest. Wow. Talk about oversimplifying. I'd really like know what you think a corporation is made of. You paint a picture of the Monopoly guy bouncing around a penthouse smoking a pipe. When a company like Boeing gets a government contract it employs thousands of people. There have to be people on the assembly line putting the shit together. In order to eliminate government contracts to civilian compaies, the military would have to produce all of their own equipment. That would mean, gasp, drastically increasing the size of the military. And the pregnant Mexican with 5 kids you speak of is in fact a drag on the economy... assuming she's drawing welfare, sending her kids to public school, and soon to be enrolled in free healthcare. Quote Well, like the war, if anyone didn't vote for goping, they were a terrorist, so until the D's are firmly in control will we see what they can/will do, as with Clinton. We saw what he did with the fiscal nature of the US and what this POS did after, so I would like to roll back to that. So Obama's voting record is the fault of republicans. He was guilted into voting that way by the GOP. Great. Spine of jellow. The D's have an approval rating roughly half of Bush's. I too am anxious (ie. nervous) to see what will happen when they're in total control. QuoteI just think they are different Socialists, McCain is Socialist in that he wants to cut taxes and spend money to be earned somewhere in the 22nd century, Obama wants to be Socialist and distribute wealth. McCain wants to cut taxes and cut spending. Obama wants to shift taxes to anyone above middle-class and increase spending. He doesn't want to distribute wealth. He wants to redistribute. Big difference. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #50 October 20, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Obama is clearly the best choice of the two, middle class made this country and I will be glad when I see Obama in as pres. McCain is two old and will lose. Interesting concept you have there of 'middle class', if you think that Senators qualify as such. I didn't say senators. Everybody that follows politics knows that Mccain is for the rich, He didn't even know how many houses he owned, LOL. Sounds like you've already got all the blue Kool-Aid you can handle, but I'll see if I make it a little more purple. Houses - since the houses were bought as investments (which his wife handles), why would he necessarily know? What is your opinion of Warren Buffets' wife not knowing what stock positions he holds? As for the "McCain is for the rich" comment, here's a primer for you - a lower tax rate equates to MORE people who are off the tax rolls. Explain how letting the Bush tax cuts expire (which is what the Dems have already said they will do) is going to help the middle class.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
