@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
David, that is simply ludicrous. Would you care to tell me what you think Obama intends to do that is Marxist. And support it with something that Marx actually said, rather than the standard right wing cant that simply calls anything liberal Marxist. It's about as accurate as it would be if liberals called everything conservatives do fascistic (tho I do have to say the Bush-Cheney-Rove-Rumsfeld-Yoo doctrine of the unitary presidency, unaccountable to Congrss, the judiciary, or the people, was skating awfully near "ein Reich, ein Volk, ein Fuehrer")
I was saddened n disappointed by Reagan 's choice of Bush
and I said so in 1980. The Bushes are not conservatives.
The subject matter of the conservation is the philosophy
of the Founders as set forth in the US Constitution, as amended.
The American Revolution was a successful libertarian movement.
The Constitution is an instrument of personal liberty,
by strangling the domestic power of government in numerous ways
some of which r set forth in the Bill of Rights.
The Founders belived in freedom of contract and a
laissez faire free market.
I join them in that. Personal liberty does not mean much to the Bushes.
A
REAL conservative was Barry Goldwater or Bob Barr.
Your linking the concept of conservatives to fascists is irrational.
Conservatives are
libertarians and
Individualists.
Fascists are
authoritarians and
collectivists.
Mussolini was a life-long socialist.
He did not have an epiphany
requiring him to turn his back on socialism.
( If u deny this, then please tell us
WHEN
n describe its circumstances. )
Obama struck me as singularly
candid when he objected
to failure of the USSC to "re-distribute the wealth" as if it were supposed to do that.
With that not being bad enuf,
even before inauguration, he attacked the concept of the Posse Comitatus Act,
so that he can use the Army as his personal police force;
a little reminiscent of the German S.A.
