View Full Version : SOCIALISM: In the Dictionary
SOCIALIST
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
No "LIBERAL" here either! Amazing! (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism)
I would agree that the word "liberal" is not found in the definition of "socailism". Many on the right automatically associate the two, claiming that all liberals are socialists. This is not so. I used to get so pissed at Limbaugh when he arrogantly stated that all Independants are of weak character and afraid to take a stand in what they really believe in. That's why my title is about labels. It seems like we are taught from youth to lump people together in groups and label them. What if you don't totally fit the label you are lumped into? I had an interesting thought yesterday...if most of our pols are lawyers, and our legal system is an adversarial system, has Politics in America become adversarial as well? It sure looks that way to me.
Socialism, an example.....
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printindividualProfile.asp?indid=1241
ad4mg
03-21-2008, 12:05 PM
Socialism, an example.....
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printindividualProfile.asp?indid=1241
Yeah, damn him for not being a Nazi/Communist supporter of the dick 'n boosh criminal regime. I wonder what's the matter with him? Flag draped coffins, dead civilians, and a corrupt war are considered patriotic by the hate filled right wing.
What's not to love about these Momma's boy cowards?
n2ize
03-21-2008, 12:08 PM
Socialism, an example.....
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printindividualProfile.asp?indid=1241
How utterly ghastly. An educated black man who dared to speak out against the Vietnam war and call for peace. A man who married Ruby Dee and was one of the most successful black actors and directors in America. A man who walked the walk and played a key role in the struggle for equal rights and opportunity. If he is an example of socialism then socialism is not a bad thing at all.
How utterly ghastly. An educated black man who dared to speak out against the Vietnam war and call for peace. A man who married Ruby Dee and was one of the most successful black actors and directors in America. A man who walked the walk and played a key role in the struggle for equal rights and opportunity. If he is an example of socialism then socialism is not a bad thing at all.
He is dead now, problem solved.
Socialism, example #2.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printindividualProfile.asp?indid=2009
n2ize
03-21-2008, 01:25 PM
He is dead now, problem solved.
No surprise at this remark coming from a someone who digs death and see's death as the solution to all problems. The usual ultra conservative hatred towards anyone who doesn't share the narrow minded framework that personified the conservative mindset.
But actually he's not dead. Because he lives on in his work and through the many he inspired and through his lasting legacy and the find works through which he will be remembered. Rest assured, he will be revered by many for generations to come and long after all the intolerant haters are long forgotten.
KC4HGH
03-21-2008, 04:27 PM
-If you don't mind the government taking your property you worked so hard to pay for, for the good of the people, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind having state-run health programs (that don't work in other countries), you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind wealth distribution and supporting others who won't work, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind getting paid the same pittance others do, but you work twice as hard, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind your children being indoctrinated to things you don't approve of without your input, approval, knowledge or consent, you may be a socialist.
-If you do not mind being disarmed for your own protection, but only the police/military and criminals have weapons, leaving you naked and defenseless, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind having every aspect of your life controlled from birth to death, with no freedom to think, act, speak, love, or otherwise control anything of your own life, then you may be a socialist.
It makes you wonder WHY the government wants to control their constituant's lives, and many of those constituants bow down in their favor, with no backbone to stand on their own...those constituants ARE socialists! It's also no wonder why socialism is compared to and attached with the words, "liberal" and "left-wing", since many of these people seem to want socialism....
Socialism may have been a good idea that otherwise got adulterated by man and that's precisely why it won't work. It'll never work, and has never worked where it was implemented no matter how hard one tries, because human ambitions and aspirations will rise above the doldrums created by socialism.
Hence, people's concept of "liberal = socialist"...
-If you don't mind the government taking your property you worked so hard to pay for, for the good of the people, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind having state-run health programs (that don't work in other countries), you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind wealth distribution and supporting others who won't work, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind getting paid the same pittance others do, but you work twice as hard, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind your children being indoctrinated to things you don't approve of without your input, approval, knowledge or consent, you may be a socialist.
-If you do not mind being disarmed for your own protection, but only the police/military and criminals have weapons, leaving you naked and defenseless, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind having every aspect of your life controlled from birth to death, with no freedom to think, act, speak, love, or otherwise control anything of your own life, then you may be a socialist.
It makes you wonder WHY the government wants to control their constituant's lives, and many of those constituants bow down in their favor, with no backbone to stand on their own...those constituants ARE socialists! It's also no wonder why socialism is compared to and attached with the words, "liberal" and "left-wing", since many of these people seem to want socialism....
Socialism may have been a good idea that otherwise got adulterated by man and that's precisely why it won't work. It'll never work, and has never worked where it was implemented no matter how hard one tries, because human ambitions and aspirations will rise above the doldrums created by socialism.
Hence, people's concept of "liberal = socialist"...
This is too deep and thoughtful for many of the previous posters. Either that or they are trying to hide behind the eight ball.
n2ize
03-21-2008, 04:59 PM
-If you don't mind the government taking your property you worked so hard to pay for, for the good of the people, you may be a socialist.
Is that why Bush is taking peoples property away in order to build his border fence ? I guess Bush must be one of the worlds biggest socialists then. But he is not going to take the property of the rich guy who made big donations to the Bush campaign. The fence will simply not be built on that guys property.
-If you don't mind having state-run health programs (that don't work in other countries), you may be a socialist.
Actually the health programs in other countries DO work and people don't have to go bankrupt or sell their homes to get health care not do they pay 3x as much for their prescritions.
-If you don't mind wealth distribution and supporting others who won't work, you may be a socialist.
That's hard to say. What exactly is "wealth distribution" ? In a decent society that provides for it's people the distribution of wealth should be relatively even and there shouldn't be small pockets of extreme wealth and huge pockets of extreme poverty as we have seen in this country particularly in areas where capitalism has gone defunct.
-If you don't mind getting paid the same pittance others do, but you work twice as hard, you may be a socialist.
So they you feel that the physical laborers SHOULD be paid more than the CEO's. After all the laborers do the hard work.
I'll let someone else debunk the rest.
Socialism may have been a good idea that otherwise got adulterated by man and that's precisely why it won't work.
The same can be said of anything. What you essentialy made is a blank statement unless you qualify it with some kind of specifics. It can readilly be argued that capitalism has been adulterated and also that capitalism will never work because it depends upon the process of exploitation, i.e. getting something for less and distributing it for more to gain a profit. Thus, for capitalism to be profitable you must exploit someones labor, be it at home or overseas. This is exemplified by the eagerness of coroprations to outsource jobs at cheaper cost or to exploit labour pools in 3rd world countries.
It'll never work, and has never worked where it was implemented no matter how hard one tries, because human ambitions and aspirations will rise above the doldrums created by socialism.
It depends on where it was implemented and in what form and to what degree.
Every nation that progresses forward in some way will have elements of socialism within it's structure. Including the USA.
Actually it has worked in the USA as it's essentially the reason we have (or had) a robust middle class in this country. Most of the elements of government that made the rapid and robust growth of the middle class are elements that you would likely construe as "socialism", based on the ideas you presented earlier.
ad4mg
03-21-2008, 06:49 PM
This is too deep and thoughtful for many of the previous posters. Either that or they are trying to hide behind the eight ball.
Actually, it's so filled with rage, hate, and is so stereotypical, it isn't really worth any serious effort. It's a total exaggeration, only hints at reality, but is great food for the New World Order Conservative. You can read it in a sing-song fashion and beat your war drums to it.
It's no surprise that you would like it.
He is dead now, problem solved.
Bonus points for you. I actually think you become stimulated by the thought of death.
So many spiteful, hateful little people. I hope you pass on the hatred to your offspring. We can be assured of the continuing destruction of this country by perpetuating your seething hatred.
Comrades.
KC4HGH
03-21-2008, 06:51 PM
'ize John, you ARE hiding behind the 8-ball. Just to pick a couple of points:
-PLEASE go to Cuba and try to get treated for your next ailment. I'll bet you'll never get treated in time....
-you will soon have immigrants, illegal or not, be assigned to live with you in your apartment.
-you will also have to clothe and feed your new bedfellows with the pittance the socialist government will allow you each month...no longer will you enjoy the salary you once earned (if, indeed you DO work- you seem to be here at all hours).
-you will be assigned a job that you may or may not be familiar with, to earn that little pittance the government allows you each month.
-if you walk everywhere now, that'll be your primary mode of transportation. If you're fortunate to buy a bike, it'll take a long time to save for it, on your new government pittance. Or you MAY be fortunate enough to catch a government-regulated bus and may or may not have to pay for it.
-your freedom of speech will be muzzled and you will no longer be able to bad-mouth the Administration in power.
-your open-mindedness will no longer be allowed and your access to QRZ.com will be cut off.
-if you have any Ham gear, it will be taken from you, unless it is strictly regulated...then it will be divided between you and those that have not, who will also be severely regulated. There goes the gear you worked hard to pay for....
-your views on guns will not be tolerated.
-Yep, the government will put up a fence to keep you in- not keep illegal aliens out- and take your land to do it as well, no matter your former social standing.
-free enterprize will no longer be tolerated...so you may no longer enjoy the fruits of your labors.
-enjoy your new socialist life....
Now, looking at your side, sure, the government we have- a republic, governed by the politicians you and I voted into power- have the obligation to defend this country from enemies, from within and without. I'm sure that the farmers along the border didn't mind allowing the crews to put up fence to keep invaders out- heck , I would allow it! However, if they had cattle watering in the Rio Grande, then the government can carefully and safely install a fence right in the river- it isn't deep- to allow those cattle to continue their watering. May I ask how President Bush is taking this land away? Are there instances of eminant domain in this supposed taking of land for fences? Cite them....
Your faulting of one man to the taking of property shows how narrow-minded your thinking is...if one man had that kind of power, then you wouldn't have the freedom to condemn him.
I agree, however, that our society has a little bit of this and a little bit of that from many types of other kinds of government...our Founding Fathers were far-thinkers, knowing that some aspects of some types of governance is better in small doses, rather than a total governance of only one.
I work in a business where everyone enjoys a bonus with our working hard together. Yes, that's a small slice of socialism, but done correctly, we all work hard to excel. To be sure, we have our slackards...we expose them for what they are, though, and won't let them get "socialistic". Nonetheless, I am individually rewarded for my hard work and no one takes it from me- except for taxes, and you can thank a politician for THAT.
As for redistribution of wealth: the original "welfare system" was that the early church put forth, in taking care of widows and orphans. There was also goods offered for the furthering of the Gospel (good news). The tithe, which is 10% of wages, was given to take care those in need. Now, the government steps in years ago and takes, what was a temporary funding for a war, and turns it into a corrupted system, penalizing us forever. On top of that, socialism would take all the money you USED to make and divvy it up amongst everyone else, deserving ot not...would you like the church-based system or the socialized system?
As for the adulteration of any system, when man gets hold of anything, it can be abused- because of greed, things get fouled up from the original intent.
Is this clear enough?
ad4mg
03-21-2008, 06:54 PM
'ize John, you ARE hiding behind the 8-ball. Just to pick a couple of points:
-PLEASE go to Cuba and try to get treated for your next ailment. I'll bet you'll never get treated in time....
-you will soon have immigrants, illegal or not, be assigned to live with you in your apartment.
-you will also have to clothe and feed your new bedfellows with the pittance the socialist government will allow you each month...no longer will you enjoy the salary you once earned (if, indeed you DO work- you seem to be here at all hours).
-you will be assigned a job that you may or may not be familiar with, to earn that little pittance the government allows you each month.
-if you walk everywhere now, that'll be your primary mode of transportation. If you're fortunate to buy a bike, it'll take a long time to save for it, on your new government pittance. Or you MAY be fortunate enough to catch a government-regulated bus and may or may not have to pay for it.
-your freedom of speech will be muzzled and you will no longer be able to bad-mouth the Administration in power.
-your open-mindedness will no longer be allowed and your access to QRZ.com will be cut off.
-if you have any Ham gear, it will be taken from you, unless it is strictly regulated...then it will be divided between you and those that have not, who will also be severely regulated. There goes the gear you worked hard to pay for....
-your views on guns will not be tolerated.
-Yep, the government will put up a fence to keep you in- not keep illegal aliens out- and take your land to do it as well, no matter your former social standing.
-free enterprize will no longer be tolerated...so you may no longer enjoy the fruits of your labors.
-enjoy your new socialist life....
Now, looking at your side, sure, the government we have- a republic, governed by the politicians you and I voted into power- have the obligation to defend this country from enemies, from within and without. I'm sure that the farmers along the border didn't mind allowing the crews to put up fence to keep invaders out- heck , I would allow it! However, if they had cattle watering in the Rio Grande, then the government can carefully and safely install a fence right in the river- it isn't deep- to allow those cattle to continue their watering. May I ask how President Bush is taking this land away? Are there instances of eminant domain in this supposed taking of land for fences? Cite them....
Your faulting of one man to the taking of property shows how narrow-minded your thinking is...if one man had that kind of power, then you wouldn't have the freedom to condemn him.
I agree, however, that our society has a little bit of this and a little bit of that from many types of other kinds of government...our Founding Fathers were far-thinkers, knowing that some aspects of some types of governance is better in small doses, rather than a total governance of only one.
I work in a business where everyone enjoys a bonus with our working hard together. Yes, that's a small slice of socialism, but done correctly, we all work hard to excel. To be sure, we have our slackards...we expose them for what they are, though, and won't let them get "socialistic". Nonetheless, I am individually rewarded for my hard work and no one takes it from me- except for taxes, and you can thank a politician for THAT.
As for redistribution of wealth: the original "welfare system" was that the early church put forth, in taking care of widows and orphans. There was also goods offered for the furthering of the Gospel (good news). The tithe, which is 10% of wages, was given to take care those in need. Now, the government steps in years ago and takes, what was a temporary funding for a war, and turns it into a corrupted system, penalizing us forever. On top of that, socialism would take all the money you USED to make and divvy it up amongst everyone else, deserving ot not...would you like the church-based system or the socialized system?
As for the adulteration of any system, when man gets hold of anything, it can be abused- because of greed, things get fouled up from the original intent.
Is this clear enough?
It's goofy. He lives in the United States. It's incredible that you spin and weave Cuba into the discussion. Not surprising, though. Deceit and exaggeration are Neoconservative tools of the trade.
KC4HGH
03-21-2008, 07:16 PM
'mg: Cuba is but one example...there are numerous others. Your vacuous spin and exaggeration is typical of one who embraces something other than what this great country has to offer....
Actually, it's so filled with rage, hate, and is so stereotypical, it isn't really worth any serious effort. It's a total exaggeration, only hints at reality, but is great food for the New World Order Conservative. You can read it in a sing-song fashion and beat your war drums to it.
It's no surprise that you would like it.
Bonus points for you. I actually think you become stimulated by the thought of death.
So many spiteful, hateful little people. I hope you pass on the hatred to your offspring. We can be assured of the continuing destruction of this country by perpetuating your seething hatred.
Comrades.
Speaking of hate, re-read what I said and your post again. This type of speech (writing) is exactly why so many people mistrust liberals...socialists, progressives, communists, or whatever you wish to be called.
ad4mg
03-21-2008, 08:07 PM
'mg: Cuba is but one example...there are numerous others. Your vacuous spin and exaggeration is typical of one who embraces something other than what this great country has to offer....
You mean this once great country that now invades sovereign nations without justification, tortures it's enemies, and apparently is incapable of capturing or killing the mass murderer of over 3,000 innocent Americans?
When debating a citizen and resident of the U.S., it is meaningless to use a communist ruled country as an example. It is equally meaningless to use any other country who has a different form of government than our own.
Is there a problem debating 'IZE, and limiting the discussion to the only relevant country to that discussion?
Or must you spin, deceive, and weave, in typical Neoconservative fashion?
I suspect it is the latter.
ad4mg
03-21-2008, 08:15 PM
Speaking of hate, re-read what I said and your post again. This type of speech (writing) is exactly why so many people mistrust liberals...socialists, progressives, communists, or whatever you wish to be called.
American. That's my preference. I know you can't stand anyone who isn't nailed firmly to your partisan platform practicing their freedom of speech. Best get used to it.
The tone of your post is clear to those who have their eyes open. Yours was an endorsement of the gross exaggerations in the uber right wing spewage which attempted to offer a skewed and juvenile association between liberals and socialists.
Is this part of the New World Order Conservative doctrine for the New American Century?
I see it as pure, unbridled hatred, used as a tool for political gain. Smear those with whom you disagree. It's worked very well for the Repugnant Party for the last 7-1/2 years. Unfortunate that folks are starting to catch on.
KC4HGH
03-21-2008, 08:36 PM
You mean this once great country that now invades sovereign nations without justification, tortures it's enemies, and apparently is incapable of capturing or killing the mass murderer of over 3,000 innocent Americans?
When debating a citizen and resident of the U.S., it is meaningless to use a communist ruled country as an example. It is equally meaningless to use any other country who has a different form of government than our own.
Is there a problem debating 'IZE, and limiting the discussion to the only relevant country to that discussion?
Or must you spin, deceive, and weave, in typical Neoconservative fashion?
I suspect it is the latter.
Oh, no, I have no problem debating...and there are other countries, like Cuba, who have been ruined by socialism/communism/despotism/and many other -isms; Cuba was just convenient, since it's 90 miles away...but you're not counting them, are you? Nor are you able to aknowledge countries who have thrown off oppressive regimes and have an improved quality of life under democracy or a republic.
However, it IS a bit hard trying to reason with someone who hates so badly, it clouds their judgement. Maybe you could go get your citizenship in a socialist country and form your opinion after a year or so there....then we'll debate. Anything else out of you is hateful verbage, as you try to spin away from the original vein of this post....
K0RGR
03-21-2008, 08:58 PM
Cuba is a totalitarian, communist regime, in some ways similar to North Korea. Communism is the most extreme form of socialism. North Korea combines the totalitarian communist regime with a repressive military dictatorship. China used to be a communist country, but now, it is a capitalist country with a repressive, undemocratic regime.
None of these are in any way similar to France, which practices many forms of socialism. They have a 'cradle-to-grave' welfare system that is envied by many. But you can't tell me that the French people are afraid to speak out politically!
KC4HGH
03-21-2008, 09:03 PM
Cuba is a totalitarian, communist regime, in some ways similar to North Korea. Communism is the most extreme form of socialism. North Korea combines the totalitarian communist regime with a repressive military dictatorship. China used to be a communist country, but now, it is a capitalist country with a repressive, undemocratic regime.
None of these are in any way similar to France, which practices many forms of socialism. They have a 'cradle-to-grave' welfare system that is envied by many. But you can't tell me that the French people are afraid to speak out politically!
Good points!
ad4mg
03-21-2008, 10:25 PM
Oh, no, I have no problem debating...and there are other countries, like Cuba, who have been ruined by socialism/communism/despotism/and many other -isms; Cuba was just convenient, since it's 90 miles away...but you're not counting them, are you? Nor are you able to aknowledge countries who have thrown off oppressive regimes and have an improved quality of life under democracy or a republic.
However, it IS a bit hard trying to reason with someone who hates so badly, it clouds their judgement. Maybe you could go get your citizenship in a socialist country and form your opinion after a year or so there....then we'll debate. Anything else out of you is hateful verbage, as you try to spin away from the original vein of this post....
Your disconnect with reality fuels your hatred. Now you suggest my moving to another country. Is this a failure on your part to be able to debate where the discussion is actually relevant?
You won't even attempt to discuss the issue until "maybe after I get my citizenship in a socialist country". Well, I live in America, and I don't bow to partisan hatred like you do with your allegiance to uber right wing ideals. And you don't know quite how to deal with that.
Debate the man on the issues within this country. If you are capable.
n2ize
03-21-2008, 11:08 PM
'ize John, you ARE hiding behind the 8-ball. Just to pick a couple of points:
-PLEASE go to Cuba and try to get treated for your next ailment. I'll bet you'll never get treated in time....
-you will soon have immigrants, illegal or not, be assigned to live with you in your apartment.
-you will also have to clothe and feed your new bedfellows with the pittance the socialist government will allow you each month...no longer will you enjoy the salary you once earned (if, indeed you DO work- you seem to be here at all hours).
-you will be assigned a job that you may or may not be familiar with, to earn that little pittance the government allows you each month.
-if you walk everywhere now, that'll be your primary mode of transportation. If you're fortunate to buy a bike, it'll take a long time to save for it, on your new government pittance. Or you MAY be fortunate enough to catch a government-regulated bus and may or may not have to pay for it.
-your freedom of speech will be muzzled and you will no longer be able to bad-mouth the Administration in power.
-your open-mindedness will no longer be allowed and your access to QRZ.com will be cut off.
-if you have any Ham gear, it will be taken from you, unless it is strictly regulated...then it will be divided between you and those that have not, who will also be severely regulated. There goes the gear you worked hard to pay for....
-your views on guns will not be tolerated.
-Yep, the government will put up a fence to keep you in- not keep illegal aliens out- and take your land to do it as well, no matter your former social standing.
-free enterprize will no longer be tolerated...so you may no longer enjoy the fruits of your labors.
-enjoy your new socialist life....
Now, looking at your side, sure, the government we have- a republic, governed by the politicians you and I voted into power- have the obligation to defend this country from enemies, from within and without. I'm sure that the farmers along the border didn't mind allowing the crews to put up fence to keep invaders out- heck , I would allow it! However, if they had cattle watering in the Rio Grande, then the government can carefully and safely install a fence right in the river- it isn't deep- to allow those cattle to continue their watering. May I ask how President Bush is taking this land away? Are there instances of eminant domain in this supposed taking of land for fences? Cite them....
Your faulting of one man to the taking of property shows how narrow-minded your thinking is...if one man had that kind of power, then you wouldn't have the freedom to condemn him.
I agree, however, that our society has a little bit of this and a little bit of that from many types of other kinds of government...our Founding Fathers were far-thinkers, knowing that some aspects of some types of governance is better in small doses, rather than a total governance of only one.
I work in a business where everyone enjoys a bonus with our working hard together. Yes, that's a small slice of socialism, but done correctly, we all work hard to excel. To be sure, we have our slackards...we expose them for what they are, though, and won't let them get "socialistic". Nonetheless, I am individually rewarded for my hard work and no one takes it from me- except for taxes, and you can thank a politician for THAT.
As for redistribution of wealth: the original "welfare system" was that the early church put forth, in taking care of widows and orphans. There was also goods offered for the furthering of the Gospel (good news). The tithe, which is 10% of wages, was given to take care those in need. Now, the government steps in years ago and takes, what was a temporary funding for a war, and turns it into a corrupted system, penalizing us forever. On top of that, socialism would take all the money you USED to make and divvy it up amongst everyone else, deserving ot not...would you like the church-based system or the socialized system?
As for the adulteration of any system, when man gets hold of anything, it can be abused- because of greed, things get fouled up from the original intent.
Is this clear enough?
No, because you are not interested in having a conversation . You ignored what I said and presented a hypothetical worst case extreme scenario intertwingled with shades of Cuba while disregarding all the other points and exemplifications of socialist elements within America that have greatly benefitted our nations poor and middle class.
As for the adulteration of any system, when man gets hold of anything, it can be abused- because of greed, things get fouled up from the original intent.
And capitalism doesn't need adulteration to make it exploitative. You profit by getting something at a lower price and selling it for a higher price. That not only includes inanimate goods but human labor as well. This has been exemplified time and time again by the low wage sweatshops of the turn of the century, the robber barons of the Gilded age, the labor disputes and the need for organized labor to bring wages closer to the standard of living, and nowadays, by the outsourcing of jobs and the use of thirds would labor. It's all about getting something on the cheap and selling it for more. One could therefore arge that capitalism is flawed and prone to extreme abouse by it's very essence and without human adulteration. Does that mean we discard capitalism ? No. We try to find a balance (hopefully) between highly exploitative proactices versus policies that people can live with.
The same holds true for socialism. taken to the extreme socialism can be a nightmare, just as with overly exploitative capitalism. However, with proper checks and balances humans can, and have benefitted from both.
Furthermore you make at least two (or more) self contradictions in your argument above. I presume you were typing quickly and trying to say a lot as quickly as possible. No need to. I generally make a few posts here and dissapear for several hours so, take your time. For instance you imply that you accept that there are elements of socialism that serve our society then you argue that socialsim will turn us all into low paid slaves. But capitalism can do that too and there are many examples of where it has. So which will it be, extreme socialism, extreme capitalism, or neither or perhaps some of both.
Incidentally, are capitalism and socialism mutually exclusive ? Can both co-exist in a society ? What is the antipode of socialism ? Of capitalsim ?
You mean this once great country that now invades sovereign nations without justification, tortures it's enemies, and apparently is incapable of capturing or killing the mass murderer of over 3,000 innocent Americans?
You just keep repeating yourself, so I will repeat....Iraq under Saddam (your friend) attacked our military multiple time from the end of the first gulf war until the country was invaded.
What's wrong, do you have a mental block or mental defect.
No, because you are not interested in having a conversation .
Several people have tried having conversations with you and you refuse to consider any point you do no make or hold. You are being so closed minded about anyone else's opinion.
If you want to have a conversation, you should keep it couterous and be prepard to alter you opinions. Some progress might be made then.
n2ize
03-22-2008, 03:10 AM
Several people have tried having conversations with you and you refuse to consider any point you do no make or hold. You are being so closed minded about anyone else's opinion.
You are confusing disagreement with closed minded. They are two different things. The author of the original post stated that socialism always leads to total disaster. I stated several factual examples of where elements of socialism have benefitted our society. Now you may disagree with those facts but thet does not imply that the person you disagree with is closed minded.
If you want to have a conversation, you should keep it couterous and be prepard to alter you opinions. Some progress might be made then.[/QUOTE]
What is couterous ? Is that French ? If you mean courteous, actually the conversation was quite courteous. Dissagreement does not imply lack of courtesy. One can disagree with someone yet remain a courteous person. Try writing a truth table for that .
Meanwhile what you are trying to say is that you consider a courteous conversation one in which the person agrees with you.
Several people have tried having conversations with you and you refuse to consider any point you do no make or hold. You are being so closed minded about anyone else's opinion.
If you want to have a conversation, you should keep it couterous and be prepard to alter you opinions. Some progress might be made then.
Dont count on it.
-If you don't mind the government taking...
...It's also no wonder why socialism is compared to and attached with the words, "liberal" and "left-wing", since many of these people seem to want socialism....
Hence, people's concept of "liberal = socialist"...
It is so nice to see a *SNICKER* Christian blowing hot and cold hate on the eve of the Holiest day in Christianity, on the day that the crucifixion took place. Thank you for making my point.
Neither do you have a clue as to what a Liberal is. I suggest you see the thread on LIBERALISM to get the definition.
One could infer from your post:
Uptight, Ubiquitous, Religious, Chest-Thumping-in-the-middle-of-the-road Christian Dude = Hate
God = Hate (God Forbid but I imagine people like this tempt Him.)
I can't imagine why so many people find Christians and Christianity so reprehensible. I will say this, and bet on it. When God does get around to straightening things out, watch what he doles out to the haters. To those who are so extremist and miserable in His name and want to share it with the world. We're certainly not going to pay for their hating.
As stated originally, there is no Socialism in the definition for Liberal, nor vice-versa, although there are people who either can't read or are just that extremist to argue with bare bone facts.
Let me know when red becomes green in your mind. I'll stay indoors that day.
ad4mg
03-22-2008, 09:55 AM
You just keep repeating yourself, so I will repeat....Iraq under Saddam (your friend) attacked our military multiple time from the end of the first gulf war until the country was invaded.
What's wrong, do you have a mental block or mental defect.
Duh. We went through this. Not one single plane (British or American) was damaged, hit, disabled, or in any danger of any of the above while enforcing the U.N. imposed (isn't that ironic - you righties hate the UN) "no-fly" zones.
In retaliation, we bombed numerous Iraqi installations that "painted" our planes, killing hundreds of innocent civilians.
Sound like a great reason to bomb the whole damn country back to the stone age.
Do you have a mental defect? Or are you truly with the war mongering PNAC inspired New American Century Conservatives? Or are you another Angel of Death that gets aroused at the thought of death and destruction in a helpless country on the other side of the planet?
Riddle me this, Comrade, where is Osama bin Laden, and why hasn't king george, your hero, fulfilled his promise to capture or kill this maniac?
Duh. We went through this. Not one single plane (British or American) was damaged, hit, disabled, or in any danger of any of the above while enforcing the U.N. imposed (isn't that ironic - you righties hate the UN) "no-fly" zones.
In retaliation, we bombed numerous Iraqi installations that "painted" our planes, killing hundreds of innocent civilians.
Sound like a great reason to bomb the whole damn country back to the stone age.
Do you have a mental defect? Or are you truly with the war mongering PNAC inspired New American Century Conservatives? Or are you another Angel of Death that gets aroused at the thought of death and destruction in a helpless country on the other side of the planet?
Riddle me this, Comrade, where is Osama bin Laden, and why hasn't king george, your hero, fulfilled his promise to capture or kill this maniac?
Yes we have been through this. The US lead coalition defeated the Iraq Army in the first Gulf war following the invasion of Kuwait. He agreed to not fly nor attack people in the no-fly zones. He repeatedly did so and the now president responded with another coalition. The US Congress approved his actions and the UN did as well.
Facts you either ignore or dismiss, speaking of mental defects.
You are confusing disagreement with closed minded. They are two different things. The author of the original post stated that socialism always leads to total disaster. I stated several factual examples of where elements of socialism have benefitted our society. Now you may disagree with those facts but thet does not imply that the person you disagree with is closed minded.
Your factual examples have all ended in economic failure unless you equate longevity with success. France has now learned its lesson, North Korea can't sustain itself, would you want to live in Cuba, Russia is a mess and so on.
A country's success has alway depended on the choice of its people to succeed or fail. Do we reward failure with the fruits of the successful by law, or do we allow the successful to assist the people who failed. That should be a choice not a mandate.
ad4mg
03-22-2008, 02:43 PM
Yes we have been through this. The US lead coalition defeated the Iraq Army in the first Gulf war following the invasion of Kuwait. He agreed to not fly nor attack people in the no-fly zones. He repeatedly did so and the now president responded with another coalition. The US Congress approved his actions and the UN did as well.
Facts you either ignore or dismiss, speaking of mental defects.
Riddle me this, Comrade, where is Osama bin Laden, and why hasn't king george, your hero, fulfilled his promise to capture or kill this maniac?
Ignore? Seems as if, even by your distorted definition of reality, I have no patent on this. Why hasn't the crime regime pursued the real enemy?
Socialist, not in the dictionary.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6428
So, we have a dictionary, a dry, crusty, book, filled with words and their factual and indisputable definitions.
Then we have Danno, LinkBot Extra-ordinaire, filling volumes of his own with slanderous opinion written by people he agrees with about people he disagrees with.
KC4HGH
03-25-2008, 02:48 PM
'ize: yes, if you think about it for one instant, a tinge of socialism can be found coexisting with capitalism...look at when everyone in an office gets a bonus...not everyone in that office does the same amount of work, some may not even work enough to make an honest paycheck, BUT they get that same bonus, nonetheless....may not be good, but it benefits those who don't work....nonetheless, capitalism gives the honest WORKING person the ability to excell ahead of those who want freebies throughout their lives, those who are too LAZY to work. This is NOT a slap in the direction of truly disabled people who need a hand up..don't even go there...
And, to make another example, look at how Communist China has embraced capitalism, for their own gain...they've made so much money, WE'RE borrowing it back...a BIG mistake....
...and what of the "free" programs the government offers and continues to proffer, which will eventually be born on the backs of taxpayers like you and I? NOTHING is free....SOMEONE pays for it....
Yes, I try to type fast...I'm at work...I often am inturrupted in mid-thought and type to serve customers....
'nh: Your inability to hold to the subject at hand is notable...I guess (D) in your case stands for "diversionary tactics"...and your hate-filled, infantile jabs at folks' beliefs are laughable....stay under the bridge, troll....
'mg: all I can say is, rant on...I hardly have anything to say of substance to an unsubstantial person such as you...
MY POINT: many, many people believe, without a doubt, that today's liberal, with their ideology, are really closet socialists, hoping and wishing that the United States would fall to third-world status or below...why they wish this of their own country is ghastly to think upon. If you wish to improve the reputation and at least gain a little character of the original meaning of the word "liberal", you'd best try to be a LOT more adult and intellectually stimulating...not posting empty-headed prattle that is disguised as the latter. This is not only ME talking, but also that of many other conservatives as well...don't blame me for your reputations....
'ize: yes, if you think about it for one instant, a tinge of socialism can be found coexisting with capitalism...
And, to make another example, look at how Communist China has embraced capitalism, for their own gain...they've made so much money, WE'RE borrowing it back...a BIG mistake....
....
Do you even read your own stuff?
I didn't think so.
The wicked are not so, But they are like chaff which the wind drives away.
Keep going to church, spreading hate on Good Friday and Easter and expecting to have a reward for it. What do you want for Christmas, WW III? I'll get the popcorn guys. This ought to be good. :D
ad4mg
03-25-2008, 09:46 PM
'mg: all I can say is, rant on...I hardly have anything to say of substance to an unsubstantial person such as you...
There ain't much substance to you either, Bubba. Are you another Angel of Death?
Did you get around to answering the question? Why does your daddy, boosh duh decider, lie so about bringing to justice the mass murder of over 3,000 innocent Americans? His name, in case you uber dudes can't recall it, is Osama bin Laden. He frightens you NeoKons, doesn't he?
If that question is too difficult, continue to ignore it as all the other PNAC inspired "New World Order" lunatic conservative cowards before you have.
It just makes you less "substantial". Comrade.
There ain't much substance to you either, Bubba. Are you another Angel of Death?
Did you get around to answering the question? Why does your daddy, boosh duh decider, lie so about bringing to justice the mass murder of over 3,000 innocent Americans? His name, in case you uber dudes can't recall it, is Osama bin Laden. He frightens you NeoKons, doesn't he?
If that question is too difficult, continue to ignore it as all the other PNAC inspired "New World Order" linatic conservative cowards before you have.
It just makes you less "substantial". Comrade.
I just despise the lack or respect you show to peers and our government officials.
ad4mg
03-25-2008, 09:59 PM
I just despise the lack or respect you show to peers and our government officials.
Good. It is my intention to infuriate anyone who supports the current criminal regime. He should not have "duh decided" to invade Iraq. The fact that he did make the final decision tells me he is too stupid to hold office, or is a war criminal. Pick one.
I just despise the lack or respect you show to peers and our government officials.
You are not supposed to respect your government, you are supposed to distrust it and watch over it so that it doesn't became despotic.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
--James Madison (http://www.pithypedia.com/?author=James+Madison)
All men having power ought to be mistrusted.
--James Madison (http://www.pithypedia.com/?author=James+Madison)
Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism.
--George Washington (http://www.pithypedia.com/?author=George+Washington)
n2ize
03-25-2008, 11:55 PM
[QUOTE=KC4HGH;1176559]'ize: yes, if you think about it for one instant, a tinge of socialism can be found coexisting with capitalism...look at when everyone in an office gets a bonus...not everyone in that office does the same amount of work, some may not even work enough to make an honest paycheck, BUT they get that same bonus, nonetheless....may not be good, but it benefits those who don't work....nonetheless, capitalism gives the honest WORKING person the ability to excell ahead of those who want freebies throughout their lives, those who are too LAZY to work. This is NOT a slap in the direction of truly disabled people who need a hand up..don't even go there... p[ /quote]
Actually what you're referring to as "socialism" above has nothing to do with what I was talking about. You're giving me hypothetical examples of offices with some people that are too lazy to work. That has nothing to do with the history of capitalism, the exploitation of laborers and the subsequent fight for improived pay and wages, socialism, and the rise of the robust middle class.
kf6rdn
03-26-2008, 12:36 AM
You are not supposed to respect your government, you are supposed to distrust it and watch over it so that it doesn't became despotic.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
--James Madison (http://www.pithypedia.com/?author=James+Madison)
All men having power ought to be mistrusted.
--James Madison (http://www.pithypedia.com/?author=James+Madison)
Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism.
--George Washington (http://www.pithypedia.com/?author=George+Washington)
I don't agree, politically with alot you say, but THIS.. 100%.
Sometimes I do think both sides aughta dis the President with a bit more class, calling Bush the "FM" and Clinton "Bubba" etc..
Although "Shrillary" DOES sorta fit.. :p
But she isnt pres so...
:D
What I say politically is based entirely on the founding fathers writings.
I took my civics class seriously.
Read them and take them to heart, and don't "interpret" them.
They were written clearly and concisely, no interpretation required. The men who founded this country were not trying to hide the meaning of their words, they were trying to make the meaning as plain as possible so that they couldn't be misunderstood.
The people who claim they have interpreted the writings of Madison/Jefferson/Washington et al and are going to tell you what you don't understand about those words are hucksters trying to feed you a line of crap. Don't trust them.
Do that and you'll be saying the same things I am. Of that I am sure.
Socialism, not in the dictionary.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=59887
Socialism, not in the dictionary.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=59887
I remember when the ACLU worked hard to get the Commie Rush Limbaugh off those drug charges.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108140,00.html
Birds of a feather, I guess.
n2ize
03-26-2008, 02:10 AM
Socialism, not in the dictionary.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=59887
Thanks for the reminding me to send a donation in to the ACLU.
n2ize
03-26-2008, 02:22 AM
What I say politically is based entirely on the founding fathers writings.
I took my civics class seriously.
Read them and take them to heart, and don't "interpret" them.
They were written clearly and concisely, no interpretation required. The men who founded this country were not trying to hide the meaning of their words, they were trying to make the meaning as plain as possible so that they couldn't be misunderstood.
The people who claim they have interpreted the writings of Madison/Jefferson/Washington et al and are going to tell you what you don't understand about those words are hucksters trying to feed you a line of crap. Don't trust them.
Do that and you'll be saying the same things I am. Of that I am sure.
However, in making the statement you are in effect interpreting the writings of the forefathers. Unfortunately the founding forefathers did not use concice and logically precise statements when they constructed the constitution. Thus there are numerous ambiguities, as is common with most spoken and written word. Most of the time these ambiguities are tolerable and the general implications are understood. However, as a matter of law, when we are making critical determination of peoples rights, decisions that can ultimately result in the application oif a law, the determination of guilt or innocence, etc. these ambiguities are no longer tolerable. It is at that point that INTERPRETATION and the ability to make such interpretive decisions is imperitive. In essence the ability of learned men with extensive understanding of contitutional law must make interpretive analysis and we the people must have some level of faith and trust in those interpretations.
Thus I give you a 50%. Yes you are correct, the langauge and ambiguities are, for the most part tolerable as per everyday understandings and acceptance of what is written subject to individual subjective interpretation. In essence a document such as the constitution was written to be interpreted.
Wasn't talking about the Constitution OM.
Was talking about the myriad of letters and essays they had written explaining themselves in the years before and after. Far more enlightening than just one document.
Wasn't talking about the Constitution OM.
Was talking about the myriad of letters and essays they had written explaining themselves in the years before and after. Far more enlightening than just one document.
Please Todd. Don't confuse us with facts.
KC4HGH
03-26-2008, 10:31 PM
Do you even read your own stuff?
I didn't think so.
Sure do...makes sense to me...you must need a reading comprehension course....
KD0DKI
03-26-2008, 10:34 PM
What would happen if everyone was a republican?
Would that not be totalitarianism?
What would happen if everyone was a democarat?
Would that not be totalitarianism?
My mother always said it takes two to tango, maybe we should try to get along respect each others views and make our country "Our Country" better.
KC4HGH
03-26-2008, 10:36 PM
There ain't much substance to you either, Bubba. Are you another Angel of Death?
Did you get around to answering the question? Why does your daddy, boosh duh decider, lie so about bringing to justice the mass murder of over 3,000 innocent Americans? His name, in case you uber dudes can't recall it, is Osama bin Laden. He frightens you NeoKons, doesn't he?
If that question is too difficult, continue to ignore it as all the other PNAC inspired "New World Order" lunatic conservative cowards before you have.
It just makes you less "substantial". Comrade.
When all else fails, 'mg, just go to the ol' playbook and start calling names & belittling, huh? Your response doesn't suprise me at all....especially since you have a keyboard & screen to hide behind....
You and others remind me of the two little bullies on "A Christmas Story", Scut Farkus & the other little punk...hey, watch out for Ralphie!
When all else fails, 'mg, just go to the ol' playbook and start calling names & belittling, huh? Your response doesn't suprise me at all....especially since you have a keyboard & screen to hide behind....
You and others remind me of the two little bullies on "A Christmas Story", Scut Farkus & the other little punk...hey, watch out for Ralphie!
Hey man, if the shoe fits...
KC4HGH
03-26-2008, 10:40 PM
What would happen if everyone was a republican?
Would that not be totalitarianism?
What would happen if everyone was a democarat?
Would that not be totalitarianism?
My mother always said it takes two to tango, maybe we should try to get along respect each others views and make our country "Our Country" better.
...but it seems no one can get along? Seems like common sense went out the window in this respect a long time ago. When one side tries to reason and debate, the other side calls names and belittles like a bunch of little bullies...
Good point though....keep the good posts coming.
KC4HGH
03-26-2008, 10:42 PM
Hey man, if the shoe fits...
I'm with you, pal...and keep those civics classes coming, seems like those who forget history are doomed to repeat it!
When all else fails, 'mg, just go to the ol' playbook and start calling names & belittling, huh? Your response doesn't suprise me at all....especially since you have a keyboard & screen to hide behind....
You and others remind me of the two little bullies on "A Christmas Story", Scut Farkus & the other little punk...hey, watch out for Ralphie!
That "Christian" veneer of yours is very, very thin isn't it? (http://www.gracevalley.org/sermon_trans/2001/Doom_of_False_Christian.html)
ad4mg
03-26-2008, 10:44 PM
When all else fails, 'mg, just go to the ol' playbook and start calling names & belittling, huh? Your response doesn't suprise me at all....especially since you have a keyboard & screen to hide behind....
You and others remind me of the two little bullies on "A Christmas Story", Scut Farkus & the other little punk...hey, watch out for Ralphie!
I respond only in kind. If I annoy you, try the ignore feature here. They say it works well.
FYI - Scooter, I hide from no man. Wanna settle this over a beer and an arm wrestling match? Look me up when you're in Richmond. I'll buy the beer.
KC4HGH
03-26-2008, 10:45 PM
That "Christian" veneer of yours is very, very thin isn't it? (http://www.gracevalley.org/sermon_trans/2001/Doom_of_False_Christian.html)
...you don't miss very many opportunities to TRY and attack on a personal level, diverting from the theme, do you? A typical socialist liberal ploy, to attack one's religion or relationship with God....
Doesn't work...good shall prevail....read the last chapter, hmmmm???
KC4HGH
03-26-2008, 11:35 PM
I respond only in kind. If I annoy you, try the ignore feature here. They say it works well.
FYI - Scooter, I hide from no man. Wanna settle this over a beer and an arm wrestling match? Look me up when you're in Richmond. I'll buy the beer.
...but how will I get the perspective from the "other side", heh heh! The annoyance is in the non-adult taunting that goes on here. I would gladly engage in interesting conversation and debate, but not infantile arguing and prattle. Up for it?
Needless to say, thank you for your invitation...but I don't travel much in your area, since my company has no branches there...although I'd really like to come to Richmond someday...lots of history there, you'll have to give me a personal perspective of your city. The locals (anywhere) usually have a richer, more colorful perspective, especially if they're involved in pet projects or local such things. BTW, I can't drink any more...it riles up the Indian blood in me...and you REALLY wouldn't like me then, "Scooter"!
Hmmm...aren't we getting off the original subject? No matter...it's time to finish work (get off break) and then go home....this thread has degraded into another name-calling pitfall, anyway....goodnight.
ad4mg
03-26-2008, 11:50 PM
...but how will I get the perspective from the "other side", heh heh! The annoyance is in the non-adult taunting that goes on here. I would gladly engage in interesting conversation and debate, but not infantile arguing and prattle. Up for it?
Needless to say, thank you for your invitation...but I don't travel much in your area, since my company has no branches there...although I'd really like to come to Richmond someday...lots of history there, you'll have to give me a personal perspective of your city. The locals (anywhere) usually have a richer, more colorful perspective, especially if they're involved in pet projects or local such things. BTW, I can't drink any more...it riles up the Indian blood in me...and you REALLY wouldn't like me then, "Scooter"!
Hmmm...aren't we getting off the original subject? No matter...it's time to finish work (get off break) and then go home....this thread has degraded into another name-calling pitfall, anyway....goodnight.
Well, if you ever are in central Virginia, I'd be delighted to show you around. There are some amazing old houses in and around Richmond. There's one north of the city, near a battlefield park that still has a cannon ball embedded in the wall.
Honestly, most of my foolishness here is just that. I'll be more pleasant when the current administration is done. The Iraq invasion really chapped my butt, we we're doing so well before that.
Serious discussion is difficult here. Too much posturing. I try every now and then, but someone always punishes me for the effort. Brett gives it his best, but even he gets beat up here too.
I'll try to be nicer, like my friend, Bill, the Compassionate Neoconservative Environmentalist (k2wh) ... :eek:
73,
Luke
n2ize
03-27-2008, 12:15 AM
Wasn't talking about the Constitution OM.
Was talking about the myriad of letters and essays they had written explaining themselves in the years before and after. Far more enlightening than just one document.
For everyday reading yes. But I was speaking in terms of deciding on matters of law and policy. The ambiguity that is endemic in human langauge requires careful intepretive analysis.
For general reading and personal enlightenment there is a wider range of tolerance.
...you don't miss very many opportunities to TRY and attack on a personal level, diverting from the theme, do you? A typical socialist liberal ploy, to attack one's religion or relationship with God....
Doesn't work...good shall prevail....read the last chapter, hmmmm???
Yep. He separates the wheat from the chaff which blows away...
Seems that you've been doing the most of those personal attacks you don't like. Oh, yeh, that's right. Those personal attacks you don't like are the ones at you. From all those other Christians worshipping some other Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit and God. Can't imagine why the Christian right is worse than terrorists?
Look in any mirror. (http://www.openbible.info/topics/false_christians)
Never the less, this 'socialist' prays for you and God, not I shall be your judge.
What I say politically is based entirely on the founding fathers writings.
I took my civics class seriously.
Read them and take them to heart, and don't "interpret" them.
They were written clearly and concisely, no interpretation required. The men who founded this country were not trying to hide the meaning of their words, they were trying to make the meaning as plain as possible so that they couldn't be misunderstood.
The people who claim they have interpreted the writings of Madison/Jefferson/Washington et al and are going to tell you what you don't understand about those words are hucksters trying to feed you a line of crap. Don't trust them.
Do that and you'll be saying the same things I am. Of that I am sure.
I believe our founding father's mistrust had more to do with Western Europe than here. Their writing were based on their expierences with Britian, France and Germany.
When people of a common country begin to distrust each other, then the real problem begins. Something like a house divided? Whatever, it has been that way since the beginning. Sometimes you and Luke show animals more respect than humans who serve and some of us here.
ad4mg
03-27-2008, 12:55 AM
I believe our founding father's mistrust had more to do with Western Europe than here. Their writing were based on their expierences with Britian, France and Germany.
When people of a common country begin to distrust each other, then the real problem begins. Something like a house divided? Whatever, it has been that way since the beginning. Sometimes you and Luke show animals more respect than humans who serve and some of us here.
C'mon, big guy. I've made 2 nice posts this evening. You are real good at pointing out how we two are, but how do you miss, or fail to mention the noise coming from your side of the aisle (not you personally, mostly, you're civil)?
If it makes you feel better, you may continue to point your finger at me. I have broad shoulders, and can handle it just fine. And when this administration is gone, I'll tone things down considerably. I'll not lie, I despise the people in this administration, top to bottom, for the unforgivable sin of invading Iraq. If my Bush (lookee, I used his name all proper!) clock is right, he'll be gone in 299 days.
You seem to take this very personally. No malice intended in this question, but is participating in political discussions a good idea for you, if you're going to get this lathered up?
I'll continue to be absurd, pointing out the absurd, and will display no respect for the regime currently raping this country. I can't be any more open and honest about it.
If you haven't the stomach for it, why continue to torture (interesting word, in this day and age) yourself?
Really?
Again, there is no malice directed towards anyone here.
73,
Luke
EDIT: I could have simply stated that my dogs haven't killed any innocent civilians invading a sovereign nation, but I didn't.
I believe our founding father's mistrust had more to do with Western Europe than here. Their writing were based on their expierences with Britian, France and Germany.
When people of a common country begin to distrust each other, then the real problem begins. Something like a house divided? Whatever, it has been that way since the beginning. Sometimes you and Luke show animals more respect than humans who serve and some of us here.
I like the implication that I hate the troops that you tossed in there.
I haven't said anything about the troops, I have said a lot about the Republican Party though.
And it's little robot brigade.
I am wondering, why do you think I should show Republican sycophants respect?
After all, those same brain dead followers of stupidity have been calling progressives traitors, terrorists, and retards in various different ways for about 9 years now.
You reap what you sow there big guy. So suck it up and quit crying about it, you guys set the stage and the tone.
I do give animals more respect, that is because they are animals and incapable of the willful stupidity and sheer viciousness that was required to bring my country to the pathetic state that it finds itself in.
Trust is earned, and you clowns squandered what little of it you had long ago.
As for the founding fathers words, don't be obtuse.
They were talking about ALL forms of government. It is obvious that you have done little more than skim a few selected quotes, probably those approved by the Republican Party for propaganda purposes no doubt. That would fit in with your cry about how we are treating you jackboots so unfairly.
Spare us you hurt feelings, instead try apologizing for voting this country into irrelevance and then refrain from voting for a couple of election cycles so the adults can fix this broken nation and clean up your considerable mess.
-If you don't mind the government taking your property you worked so hard to pay for, for the good of the people, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind having state-run health programs (that don't work in other countries), you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind wealth distribution and supporting others who won't work, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind getting paid the same pittance others do, but you work twice as hard, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind your children being indoctrinated to things you don't approve of without your input, approval, knowledge or consent, you may be a socialist.
-If you do not mind being disarmed for your own protection, but only the police/military and criminals have weapons, leaving you naked and defenseless, you may be a socialist.
-If you don't mind having every aspect of your life controlled from birth to death, with no freedom to think, act, speak, love, or otherwise control anything of your own life, then you may be a socialist.
It makes you wonder WHY the government wants to control their constituant's lives, and many of those constituants bow down in their favor, with no backbone to stand on their own...those constituants ARE socialists! It's also no wonder why socialism is compared to and attached with the words, "liberal" and "left-wing", since many of these people seem to want socialism....
Socialism may have been a good idea that otherwise got adulterated by man and that's precisely why it won't work. It'll never work, and has never worked where it was implemented no matter how hard one tries, because human ambitions and aspirations will rise above the doldrums created by socialism.
Hence, people's concept of "liberal = socialist"...
Actually, HGH meant:
-If you don't mind the government minimizing taxes for the rich so we have to borrow money from Communist China so they will later take your property you worked so hard to pay for, for the good of the people, you may be a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind having insurance-run health programs (that don't work in other countries), you may be a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind wealth distribution amongst the top 3% of the country and supporting others who won't work, you may be a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind getting paid the same pittance others do, but you work twice as hard, you ARE a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind your children being indoctrinated to things you don't approve of without your input, approval, knowledge or consent, you may be a NeoKon.
-If you do not mind being disarmed for your own protection, but only the police/military and criminals have weapons, leaving you naked and defenseless, you may be a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind having every aspect of your life controlled from birth to death, with no freedom to think, act, speak, love, or otherwise control anything of your own life, then you are a Rush Loving NeoKon.
It makes you wonder WHY the government wants to kill their constituant's lives, and many of those constituants bow down in their favor, with no backbone to stand on their own...those constituants ARE NeoKons! It's also no wonder why NeoKonism is compared to and attached with the words, "fascist" and "Nazi", since many of these people seem to want Communism....
NeoKonism may have been a good idea at a frat party that otherwise got adulterated by Rush and Kristol, and that's precisely why it won't work. It'll never work, and has never worked where it was implemented no matter how hard one tries, because human ambitions and aspirations will rise above the doldrums created by NeoKonism.
Hence, people's concept of "NeoKon = Retardism"...
KC4HGH
03-27-2008, 11:43 PM
Actually, HGH meant:
-If you don't mind the government minimizing taxes for the rich so we have to borrow money from Communist China so they will later take your property you worked so hard to pay for, for the good of the people, you may be a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind having insurance-run health programs (that don't work in other countries), you may be a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind wealth distribution amongst the top 3% of the country and supporting others who won't work, you may be a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind getting paid the same pittance others do, but you work twice as hard, you ARE a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind your children being indoctrinated to things you don't approve of without your input, approval, knowledge or consent, you may be a NeoKon.
-If you do not mind being disarmed for your own protection, but only the police/military and criminals have weapons, leaving you naked and defenseless, you may be a NeoKon.
-If you don't mind having every aspect of your life controlled from birth to death, with no freedom to think, act, speak, love, or otherwise control anything of your own life, then you are a Rush Loving NeoKon.
It makes you wonder WHY the government wants to kill their constituant's lives, and many of those constituants bow down in their favor, with no backbone to stand on their own...those constituants ARE NeoKons! It's also no wonder why NeoKonism is compared to and attached with the words, "fascist" and "Nazi", since many of these people seem to want Communism....
NeoKonism may have been a good idea at a frat party that otherwise got adulterated by Rush and Kristol, and that's precisely why it won't work. It'll never work, and has never worked where it was implemented no matter how hard one tries, because human ambitions and aspirations will rise above the doldrums created by NeoKonism.
Hence, people's concept of "NeoKon = Retardism"...
Nope, Jerry, I didn't...your satire lacks wit and sharpness. You missed the mark altogether.
If you would happen to slow down enough to understand what I meant, it all boils down to something like Franklin said about those who trade freedom for security deserve neither...and won't get it, either....
Spare us you hurt feelings, instead try apologizing for voting this country into irrelevance and then refrain from voting for a couple of election cycles so the adults can fix this broken nation and clean up your considerable mess.
Do you think the democrat party is any better? Do you think you, with your posts dripping with disrespect is the behavior of an adult? I will take great pleasure canceling your vote this cycle.
Try refresing your history lessons, or did your cirrculum include that subject?
Do you think the democrat party is any better? Do you think you, with your posts dripping with disrespect is the behavior of an adult? I will take great pleasure canceling your vote this cycle.
Try refreshing your history lessons, or did your curriculum include that subject?
kv1m is superior in every way... and don't you forget that! Just ask him... he'll tell you so.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
ad4mg
03-28-2008, 12:55 AM
Do you think the democrat party is any better? Do you think you, with your posts dripping with disrespect is the behavior of an adult? I will take great pleasure canceling your vote this cycle.
Try refresing your history lessons, or did your cirrculum include that subject?
kv1m is superior in every way... and don't you forget that! Just ask him... he'll tell you so.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
You fellows aren't being very respectful of your peers. Is there a problem, 'JO?
No more sunshine yellow smiley's for you. You've turned into a grouch. I figured it out ... you can dish it out, but you can't take it.
You should study Frozen Steve a bit. He's got it down pat. I've never seen him whine about anyone being disrespected. He just fires back, and every now and then, he actually gets it right.
Man up and stop your sniveling and whining. You gonna address the "Milk of Human Kindness Thread", or is the topic too much for you to handle?
You fellows aren't being very respectful of your peers. Is there a problem, 'JO?
No more sunshine yellow smiley's for you. You've turned into a grouch. I figured it out ... you can dish it out, but you can't take it.
You should study Frozen Steve a bit. He's got it down pat. I've never seen him whine about anyone being disrespected. He just fires back, and every now and then, he actually gets it right.
Man up and stop your sniveling and whining. You gonna address the "Milk of Human Kindness Thread", or is the topic too much for you to handle?
You are never too much to handle, your asinine remarks are fodder on the Huffington post and Daily Kos, where you must go to get ideas.
ad4mg
03-28-2008, 01:53 AM
You are never too much to handle, your asinine remarks are fodder on the Huffington post and Daily Kos, where you must go to get ideas.
I read neither. You make many assumptions. Indicates a lack of intelligence. Are you going to address your hypocrisy in avoiding the "Milk of Human Kindness" thread? Or are you running away from that as well?
Are you displaying your respect here, 'JO? You avoid discussion of this. You seem to have no respect, but you get all high and mighty being critical of others for the same.
I can understand the lack of intellegence, though, if your school system taught advanced cow turd study. You seem particularly well versed in this field.
n2ize
03-28-2008, 02:32 AM
kv1m is superior in every way... and don't you forget that! Just ask him... he'll tell you so.
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
When all else fails quote Annie. She'll protect you fron those nasty nasty libawal commy sowsalists.
KB9YCO
03-28-2008, 02:41 AM
Is it just me or is EVERY SINGLE THREAD becoming a p***ing match instead of a debate? Lighten up people! I am all for open and honest debate, but it sure seems like it's getting to the point of every thread here becoming insults. I'm not sure what it says about those involved, and I know it's an election year, but damn people, if you can't discuss things like ADULTS then maybe you need to shut it down, grab a microphone or something.
(Sorry, had to say so, I was just checking in after being here earlier and it seems that most of the top threads have really degenerated into bickering.)
Do you think the democrat party is any better? Do you think you, with your posts dripping with disrespect is the behavior of an adult? I will take great pleasure canceling your vote this cycle.
Try refresing your history lessons, or did your cirrculum include that subject?
Like I said, you aren't deserving of respect so quit crying about it like some little girl.