Schizophrenic Republicans

@gusto,

gusto;64231 wrote:

Canadians are whimps eh. Is your prejudice showing just a little bit there? LOL
We want our government to insure us security? Excuse me but what is the name of the country that excuses anything in the name of "Security?" It gets so rediculous that Reagan thought that the contras threatened the Security of the USA so he illegally supported terrorists, the Contras to kill over 100 thousand women and children and destabilize Central America to the point where they have not recovered to this day. The list of crimes commited by the USA in the name of security is very long. Hoe about the trillions of dollars the USA spends in the name of National security. You think I'm stupid or something to listen to such nonsense? The people that live in these neighbourhoods are responsible for these conditions and they are lacking in self respect? What planet do you live on anyway. What responsibility do these poor people have for what should be a municiple responsibility? we have poor people here too but we don't make them live in a rat infested polluted waste land. Your last point about Canadians having no history to make us matter is one of the most ignorant statments that I have ever heard. We have fought both in WW1 and WW2 long before the USA either thought or saw that it was a cause worth fighting for. We have created a just society where the rights of all people are respected. We have a multicultural society where every race and creed is really welcome,yes even Muslims. We have a new constitution that is the envy of the entire world wherever freedom is sought. We enjoy the respect and admiration of almost every country on the globe. We have the healthyest financial system on the planet and the list just goes on and on my friend. What are you Jealous?

Yes, my prejudice is showing, I'm not trying to hide it.
Comparing Canada to the U.S. is ludicrous.
Canadians are in fact a hardy bunch and a resourceful lot, making them quite resilient and capable. The fact is that few migrate north to beautiful Canada. The migration is from below the equator, north, and from oppressive nations of the east. And, not to Canada. Canada I'm sure would be happy, at least for a while to live up to the words on the Statue of Liberty, but, the poor, hungry and down trodden aren't interested.
Now, for the main ingredient. "BAD PEOPLE" bad people do not like cold. They function well in the heat. Running around shirtless, doing what they do doesn't work well in parkas. Parkas provided by the government I would presume.
I have heard little about the condition of Canada's economic health from anyone. Likely irrelevant.
By the way, America's economic health is not that bad. Obama, true to leftist form, has spent the last year convincing Americans how bad off they are as they sip their "lateahs" and slip into their SUV's or BMW's. His lies, which are why I consider him "evil" have had the effect of diminishing the markets and are driving the U.S. economy further and further down, from which he hopes to pull it out, thus being the hero. His strange ideas might work in Canada, a nation of "Canadians" (Europeans). Will not work in America where few are contributors and those who actually create jobs are demonized by the leftist leaches.

0 Replies

@Sabz5150,

Sabz5150;64315 wrote:

You attempt to equate Hitler to socialism?

The joke is you this go round.

Of course that's just like you to pull a quick changeup and not actually defend my accusation. You decided to have a little schpeel about those not toeing the line being dealt with... well, Plame's hubby didn't fall into file, so guess what!

Sounds like you're projecting

Hitler equated Nazism to socialism. National "SOCIALIST" Party. It is in the name and besides conquering Europe and whoever would have been next, Being all things to all people was the agenda of the Nazi regime.
The reality that they intended to service only those they liked and destroy who ever stood in the way was the difference.

1 Reply

@g-man,

g-man;64361 wrote:

Hitler equated Nazism to socialism. National "SOCIALIST" Party. It is in the name and besides conquering Europe and whoever would have been next, Being all things to all people was the agenda of the Nazi regime.
The reality that they intended to service only those they liked and destroy who ever stood in the way was the difference.

Yet the two concepts are political and ideological opposites...

The agenda of Nazism was to force control upon others. This fits in well with the conservative view, which is why they are not far away from each other.

1 Reply

@Sabz5150,

Sabz5150;64387 wrote:

1. Yet the two concepts are political and ideological opposites...

2. The agenda of Nazism was to force control upon others. This fits in well with the conservative view, which is why they are not far away from each other.

1. Bull. Nazis simply took the socialist agenda quickly to what it's goal is. Demanding reaction from the world of free nations.

2. Exactly the agenda of Barack Hussien Obama.
The conservative view is of personal responsibility including suffering the consequences of irresponsibility. The very thing that liberals use as a tool for votes.
Barack Hussien turns that irresponsibility into victimhood and the successful into the evil. I am here to expose his evil agenda. No matter what sweet face that evil bastard puts on it.

1 Reply

@g-man,

g-man;64585 wrote:

1. Bull. Nazis simply took the socialist agenda quickly to what it's goal is. Demanding reaction from the world of free nations.

Sounds like a right-wing agenda to me. Demanding a reaction for the world of free nations... sounds a lot like Iraq and Iran to me Smile

Quote:

2. Exactly the agenda of Barack Hussien Obama.

Yer fulla ****.

Quote:

The conservative view is of personal responsibility including suffering the consequences of irresponsibility.

So that's what they call Bernie Madoff's "house arrest" in his Manhattan penthouse, mailing his stolen wares to his family.

Quote:

The very thing that liberals use as a tool for votes.

Yeah, because we hate seeing the rich stand on the backs of the bruised.

Quote:

Barack Hussien turns that irresponsibility into victimhood and the successful into the evil. I am here to expose his evil agenda. No matter what sweet face that evil bastard puts on it.

While you ignore W's reign of terror. Yeah, you're a full blooded right-wingnut.

1 Reply

@Sabz5150,

Sabz5150;64593 wrote:

1. Sounds like a right-wing agenda to me. Demanding a reaction for the world of free nations... sounds a lot like Iraq and Iran to me

2. Yer fulla ****.

3. So that's what they call Bernie Madoff's "house arrest" in his Manhattan penthouse, mailing his stolen wares to his family.

4. Yeah, because we hate seeing the rich stand on the backs of the bruised.

5. While you ignore W's reign of terror. Yeah, you're a full blooded right-wingnut.

1. Rephrase the response. Yours makes no sense.
Nazism is by it's name and take over of business is socialist. The desire to be all things to all people. I will concede that at this stage, the American socialist movement is not killing the opposition. Yet.

2. You deny that Barry's agenda is for government to be all things to all people? By the way, I do not suggest that he intends to kill people to achieve the goal. Does his constant proclamation of economic crisis and his lack of control of congress to produce law, even endorsing law that he has not even taken the time to read to force the American people to give money, unmonitored, to people who have proven themselves unworthy and incapable. I believe for the sake of enforcing the idea that private business not a worthwhile endeavor. So as to eventually take total control of the nation.
Socialist will never raise the level of the standards of the poor. The best they have to offer is some revenge. Doing no one any good. The rich can afford the reduction in income. Their employees, can't afford to lose their jobs.

3. Of course at this time you're eating crow.

4. Bruised? Define. Opporitunity has never existed in any nation as it has in America in the history of man. Name a nation where the "bruised" do not exist thanks to socialism. Those defined as the "bruised" have many, many antagonist. If one is not out comforting or making individual effort to lift up the downtrodden he is simply a self righteous lazy bump expecting the government to make him feel better about himself.

5. I am. Bush is gone.
Address my accusations toward Barry turning irresponsibility into victim hood.
Or, defend the bruised. Make the excuses that make the successful responsible for their misery. Or their inability or disinterest to take advantage of opportunities available.
Personal Responsibility.

0 Replies

@affrayer,

affrayer;63707 wrote:

True for eight years we saw the real republican persona, borrow and spend with a large slice of fiscal irresponsibility.

No we didn't, we saw neoconservatives real persona. Bush/Cheney were as far from conservatives as the fish out of water B Hussien O is.

0 Replies

@Sabz5150,

Sabz5150;64315 wrote:

You attempt to equate Hitler to socialism?

You don't have a clue do you? Nazi Germany was as socialist as it gets, too bad there's too many similarities between them and you messiah B Hussein O.

2 Replies

@affrayer,

"No we didn't, we saw neoconservatives real persona. Bush/Cheney were as far from conservatives as the fish out of water B Hussien O is."

Well, Reagon was also a borrow and spend conservative, and it wasn't just Bush/ Cheney that embraced deficits over the past 8 years. The Republicans held both houses of congress for a time during his administration, and the vast majority of them embraced his deficits as well. If Bush/ Cheney aren't "real" conservatives because they embraced deficits, then neither are most other Republican politicians. I think foreign policy conservatism and economic conservatism have contradicted each other in recent years. Social conservatism and libertarian conservatism have the same problem. But any attempt to define the "real" conservatism is subjective.

"Nazism is by it's name and take over of business is socialist."

No. The opposite of real socialism is laizze faire capitalism. The fascists were neither. They didn't care about economics. They cared about nationalism, and would support any economic decisions that furthered nationalism. The socialists believed that only class mattered, and nation wasn't important. The fascists believed that only nation was important. And that conflict made them enemies.

So back to the question of where fascism stands. This political compass answers that.

Political Compass - Analysis

0 Replies

@affrayer,

This graph divides ideology into left, right by economic philosophy and up, down by social philosophy. Nazism is slightly to the right economically and very highly authoritarian on the social scale. The opposite of Nazism is anarchism since Nazism is all about the state and anarchists don't believe in a state.

If we used the traditional left, right scale however... Hitler would be on the right and socialism would be on the left.

0 Replies

@affrayer,

As for Obama being a socialist, take a look at where they place him on the political compass.

US Presidential Election 2008

"When examining the chart it's important to note that although most of the candidates seem quite different, in substance they occupy a relatively restricted area within the universal political spectrum. Democracies with a system of proportional representation give expression to a wider range of political views. While Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader are depicted on the extreme left in an American context, they would simply be mainstream social democrats within the wider political landscape of Europe. Similarly, Obama is popularly perceived as a leftist in the United States while elsewhere in the west his record is that of a moderate conservative. For example, in the case of the death penalty he is not an uncompromising abolitionist, while mainstream conservatives in all other western democracies are deeply opposed to capital punishment. The Democratic party's presidential candidate also reneged on his commitment to oppose the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He sided with the ultra conservative bloc in the Supreme Court against the Washington DC handgun ban and for capital punishment in child rape cases. He supports President Bush's faith-based initiatives and is reported in Fortune to have said that NAFTA isn't so bad. Despite all this, some angry emailers tell us that Obama is a dangerous socialist who belongs on the extreme left of our chart."

1 Reply

@NotHereForLong,

In essence, Obama panders quite well.
His view on the act of setting aside failed abortion attempts to let them die from their wounds is definition enough for me.
His being on the tv screen exhorting the horrendous condition of the economy for the purpose of sending America into recession for the sake of a historic power grab is definition enough for me.
If his lips are moving, between "uh's". he's lying.

0 Replies

@affrayer,

"His view on the act of setting aside failed abortion attempts to let them die from their wounds is definition enough for me."

Don't know what you're talking about.

"His being on the tv screen exhorting the horrendous condition of the economy for the purpose of sending America into recession for the sake of a historic power grab is definition enough for me."

Obama didn't create the recession. That's just silly. This recession is a result of a housing bubble that burst in which banks had made risky loans to homeowners who had been financially irresponsible. The banks were saddled with over a trillion dollars in toxic assets and homes lost value. Most experts consider this a serious and complex problem, as Obama does. On what basis do you say that they are wrong?

1 Reply

@NotHereForLong,

NotHereForLong;64746 wrote:

"His view on the act of setting aside failed abortion attempts to let them die from their wounds is definition enough for me."

Don't know what you're talking about.

"His being on the tv screen exhorting the horrendous condition of the economy for the purpose of sending America into recession for the sake of a historic power grab is definition enough for me."

Obama didn't create the recession. That's just silly. This recession is a result of a housing bubble that burst in which banks had made risky loans to homeowners who had been financially irresponsible. The banks were saddled with over a trillion dollars in toxic assets and homes lost value. Most experts consider this a serious and complex problem, as Obama does. On what basis do you say that they are wrong?

I'm talking about the law that forces life saving efforts to be applied to a child when in the few failures of abortion a survivor can be saved but is set aside and allowed to die. Barry opposes the law.

I agree, Barry did not create the recession. He has however been incessantly on TV explaining to America how bad they have it and that this is the worst it's been since the great depression. Since he began the rant, it has moved closer to becoming the truth. As he wishes so as to be the savior. Which of course capitalism will be the savior and he will take the credit. Unless of course he is successful in capturing the power to regulate even those industries who do not take his bailout(bait).
On what resume' do you give Barry credit for understanding economics?
Or for that matter, management background? Or administrative background?
"Campaigning" is Barry's forte'. Campaigning and reading. Reading teleprompters. Let a correspondent talk to him face to face, without a teleprompter, most of the words out of his mouth, will be "uhh". Followed by a contradiction of something he said a day or two earlier.

0 Replies

@92b16vx,

92b16vx;64656 wrote:

You don't have a clue do you? Nazi Germany was as socialist as it gets, too bad there's too many similarities between them and you messiah B Hussein O.

This is simply an abuse of political economy. The Nazis were broadly Keynesian, and Keynesianism is at its core and essence intended to uphold capitalism. Any remotely legitimate "socialist" element within the Nazi party was eliminated on the Night of the Long Knives.

1 Reply

@affrayer,

"I agree, Barry did not create the recession. He has however been incessantly on TV explaining to America how bad they have it and that this is the worst it's been since the great depression. Since he began the rant, it has moved closer to becoming the truth."

Or... it might have moved closer to becoming the truth because it really is a bad recession and it would be no matter who was president. The president has to try to neither be too optimistic OR too pessimistic, and he's struck a more optimistic tone lately. But if Obama had been happy go lucky from the beginning, I don't think the economy would be much different from what it is today.

"Which of course capitalism will be the savior and he will take the credit. Unless of course he is successful in capturing the power to regulate even those industries who do not take his bailout(bait)."

Lack of regulation is what led to the problem. What we've learned from this is that we can't let wall street be free to do whatever they want, because if they screw up, we're the ones who are going to be left cleaning up the mess. That's an argument for regulation; not deregulation. And this isn't a debate between capitalism and socialism.

"On what resume' do you give Barry credit for understanding economics?
Or for that matter, management background? Or administrative background?
"Campaigning" is Barry's forte'. Campaigning and reading."

And what is Bush's forte?... having his last name and loads of money? Campaigning is the forte of most presidents who weren't handed their party's nomination (like Bush was). What do you think Reagon's forte was? Was he called the great administrator?... the great manager?... the great economist? No. He was called the great communicator, and by all accounts wasn't very detail oriented. Can anyone say "hypocrisy".

0 Replies

@92b16vx,

92b16vx;64656 wrote:

You don't have a clue do you? Nazi Germany was as socialist as it gets, too bad there's too many similarities between them and you messiah B Hussein O.

Nazi Germany was very anti-communist. If that's what you are trying to insinuate.

0 Replies

@Agnapostate cv,

Agnapostate;64949 wrote:

This is simply an abuse of political economy. The Nazis were broadly Keynesian, and Keynesianism is at its core and essence intended to uphold capitalism. Any remotely legitimate "socialist" element within the Nazi party was eliminated on the Night of the Long Knives.

1 Reply

@affrayer,

1 Reply

@NotHereForLong,

NotHereForLong;64979 wrote:

I think he knows that (sarcasm). We don't need a basic history lesson on Nazi Germany. What he's saying is that "any remotely legitimate socialist element within the nazi party" died with the people Hitler killed that night. Frankly though, whether or not the Nazis were socialists isn't even an issue worth discussing. Anyone who believes that the Nazis were left wing is a complete idiot, and such a claim doesn't really deserve a response.

Touchy little guy aren't you? So was Adolf. lol.
Understandably, you lefties would not want to be seen as anything resembling the Nazi Party. Nor would the right. But, as America's trek toward socialism marches on, observe, just as Nazis, the government presents itself as all things to all people. Socialist as Nazis require the people to be as sheep and the government will take care of everything.

1 Reply

Schizophrenic Republicans

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know