After listening to both major candidates' views on the various issues I have decided to vote for Obama.
The main reason for this is his plan to redistribute the wealth in this country. I think that's a good thing. I think we should take other people's money (just not mine) and give it to those who need it most. As he's only talking about taking it from people other than myself I think that's a great thing. All of those rich people are just crooked leeches on society anyway. I mean really, what do any of them actually do to benefit our society anyway? I say take their money and give it to the poor and unemployed who truly do contribute to our society. Those rich bastards don't need all that money anyway.
Obama plans to use other people's money (not mine) to pay for health care benefits for those who can't afford them or simply claim they can't afford them. That's a good thing. I think other people should pay for such a program, just not me personally.
Obama plans to raise taxes on other people and not me. I think that's also a good thing as the government needs more money to spend on pet projetcs and for helping out those who are too lazy, errr I mean unable, to work. As long as other people (but not me) are paying for it, that's a good thing.
Obama will usher in a new era for America. One that will be all about change. The rich folks who can most afford it will foot the bill for the rest of us, just as it should be. The common man will no longer have to worry about high taxes, health care, or any of those other pesky issues that plague the working class. It's not like they'll actually have jobs and be working anyway. The rich folks will be paying for all of it for us.
As long as someone else is paying for it, I am all for it!
I have. For some 40 years or so. Didn't say you were 'e'fing stupid,' just endearingly naive and ignorant (in the academic sense, not the pejorative). What would you suggest as a candidate for 'the greatest evil of our time' circa 1956?
Before the allies marched into the death camps, Facism was just another word. 20 million dead in the USSR, 40 million dead in China. How much longer do we have to pretend these things did not happen "in the name of communism" just because we are supposed to respect those who practice it?
But you are wrong. Communism was the greatest evil of our time before McCarthy. The problem was that most people just had not heard about the atrocities - yet. That does not make them go away, just shows the ignorance before the enlightenment.
That's statement is a bit ironic, because under socialism you begin to waive your rights/responsibilities to the government (for entitlements), then finally under communism you have no rights, all is for the "good" of the people. Any "disagreement" is a threat to the people. You can't try it to see if you like it or not, it's not easy to throw off once it's installed. Ask the East Europeans while it's still fresh in their minds. Could the left stop at socialism without proceeding further? Well IMO the far left thinks of the government like a potato chip, "just can;t eat one".
Education must be failing in the US because we are not learning a thing from history. That or our majority "liberal left" teachers are glossing over the facts.
It boggles the mind that you always know this. How do you know and how are you always so sure?
*Sends Hugs to LW just because*
I just love that there's anyone out there with the patience to argue, debate, explain, and re-explain things to Lucas over and over again. Good stuff.
Who would have thought LW was one of them as well.
quote]Heh, Mason, if you haven't figured it out yet, 'AnthemRoad' is our old buddy Lucas, reinvented for the umpteenth time.[/quote]
Thanks whip, not like I didn't mention it in my very first article. Nope, of course not.
Irrational, illogical fear. I'm not sayiing they shouldn't have been cautious, but seriously, some of the stuff that happened then, the paranoia...puh-lease.
Also, I meant that comment in general, not specifc. I'm just tired of people implying I'm stupid or naive. I'm neither. Yes, I am ignorant of some things, everyone is of one thing or another. however, I am always learning because i love to learn, and so over time my ignorance.
People, again, I'm not naive.
Doc, do you truly listen? I'm not saying ignore the atrocities, i'm not saying that we should forget. God forbide we forget, because if we do we open ourselves to letting it happen again.
...and I think you failed reading comprehension.
I quit. I'm not normally a quiter, but you know, there's a point when you're trying to get a point across, when it's just banging your head against a brick wall. You're bleeding profusely, but you still do it.
Later.
I comprehend well enough, why don't you enlighten me further with your definition of socialism/communism instead of the superior left wing elitist "cop out answer" attitude?
An article everyone on this site was so happy to read it's the highest scoring article on the site, right? I must have been out that week though, cause this is the first time I see your name.
Lucas the problem with your or anyone else's socialism is the fundamental fact that someone ELSE is telling how much and how often I should contribute to the betterment of society. In addition to the fact that someone ELSE again gets to determine WHERE that money goes.
If you aren't smart enough to figure that one out then, that would be why you support socialism?
If so, don't impose your nanny state on me, just go back and live with mommy and daddy.
Charles, don't feel bad I missed the welcome wagon too.
Guess what, someone else already tells us where our taxes go nationally. The only exception is when you get down to the state and/or city/county level. We don't vote on national budgets, someone else does. Our elected leaders decide it, i.e. the government. For that matter, we're also told how much and how often...with taxes. It's in how much we pay, and when we pay every year. Not only that, but guess what, we also have taxes when it comes to parks and government things like that.
Welcome to a socialistic/capitalistic democratic republic of the united states of america.
Your argument is weak based on that one thing. Now, if you don't like what I'm suggesting, alright. To each their own opinion, no biggie. I don't take things personal anymore (I do get frustrated though).
First off, lay off the assumptions, it makes you come across as an asshole.
Secondly, i'm not some superior left wing elitist. Jesus e'fing christ, will you quit with that sort of shit. Seriously, please, that whole idea is childish.
For what it's worth:
My definition of socialism, or better yet, my view of socialism is that it should serve the people. Take it and eliminate the control aspects. I'm not advocating full fledged socialism, as i mentioned earlier...it won't work, because of people, us/ourselves. Example, healthcare.My goal is that everyone is covered, either by the national health care or private.
With socialism, you don't have to have complete gov't control. Look at our nation.
Also, if we got rid of every socialist aspect (or at least slimmed it down) as lulla mentioned, then we can say good by to such things as
Almost funny;see the following.
Link
There, that is what I meant. If you had looked into what I said (i.e. researched), then you would've known instead of having been a douche bag.
Thank you for answering my question. Tell mommy and daddy hi.
Again with the childish stuff, what gives?
Likewise.
That's all I needed to read to understand you. Come back when you have some real-life experience. I was knee deep in the cold war (you might have heard about it since it espouses your socialist/communist beliefs) when you were still squirting green. I'll bet your liberal teachers love your papers, good for you. Here's some advice, change your blog name again and start over, your cred is zero with me anyway (I'm sure you'll lose sleep over that).
Yeah it wasn't too hard to figure out.
I'm fascinated, just where is an example of "true communism" (since I'm assuming by true communism you mean the pure/ideal communism)? (just that you earlier mentioned that communism in it's pure form will never work).
One of the reasons Hitler was able to rise to power was due to peoples fear of the communists (well, that and blaming a fire on them), and he managed to convince a country to elect him, and parliament to make him a dictator, so I'm a bit sceptical that communism wouldn't be viewed as worrying by people without the McCarthy era. The general idea behind communism - that everyone works for the good of the country/the state, and the government operates a command economy - is terrifying to me since it would destroy the economy of a country if implimented, compared to a more capitalist approach.
I agree that the US and Europe have socialist elements in their systems of government, the most noticeable being how almost all of them feature progressive taxes. I disagree that going further down the path of socialism is a good thing though.
Whip, my war with you is over; it's been over for a long time, so I'd appreciate it if you just to stop firing at me and leave me be. No matter what you say about me in terms of trying to kick the puppy, I know I'm a good guy. I know this. You're not going to bring me down, so just don't bother. Have a nice day.
You know, I honestly will not lose any sleep I'm just truly sorry you didn't get the simple points I was trying to make, and the concessions as well that I made.
What I'm trying to get across, is that theoretically, ideally...as Marx/Engels put forth, they could work. However, because of humans, the real world, etc... it won't play out right. Essentially, it's a good idea, but when you put it in play it crashes. I'm also saying that the USSR is a bad example of communism because in communism you're supposed to have a classless society, everything is supposed to be for the people. You had classes in the Soviet Union, like it or not.
See, what some aren't getting, or perhaps I'm not getting across well enough (I'm more than willing to admit the latter) - is that i'm not some loony liberal communist/socialist, I'm just more willing to look at everything that is available and use it. I'm not going to get all paranoid or angry about the idea of using socialism, or at least a part. If a bolt in the socialistic idea will fit into our economy, and work - I'm game. I'm not so much about strict ideals (not to say I dont have any, i do), but about getting the job done. A politician is supposed to fix things and serve the people, not spout anti whatever rhetoric. In the real world, a part of the real world, is acknowledging what works and what doesn't. Like I said, if I see something that looks promising - like say universal healthcare - I'm not going to just toss it away because it'sa big bad socialist idea, because you know what, down the road maybe we'll find something that works with it that takes care of the cautious aspects of it.
Am I getting anything across? Seriously, I'm not some loon. I just suck at explaining apparently (among other things, geesh).
The communists? I could've sworn it was the Jews he blamed the big fire on, or maybe it was crime. I'll have to go look that up again because now I'm curious. (Not that I feel you're lying, I just prefer to look things up on my own)
What I'm trying to say by that, is: I've no doubt there would be those who would be worried over it. Various people have various worries over various things, it's just the way things are. The whole McCarthy thing blew the paranoia to huge proportions, moreso than what was needed in my opinion. Yes, be cautious and on guard, but to go and blacklist people and jail people because they happened to have different views (i.e. communist ones), is just crap. We're nation that was founded on diversity. Now if they had been planning an overthrow, or assination or such - then yeah there's justification. Even then, we have laws for a reason, likewise, we have a contitution for a reason. Another example of stuff like this is with Woodrow wilson and the espionage act. They locked up one guy because he argued against the first world war due to the economics of it.
Any point hitting home?
Also, what's with the bashing the education system? Some of you got your education from these places. Do they mean nothing to you? Seriously, come on.
For the record, in case some of you didn't get it when I mentioned it.
I don't agree with the welfare system as it is now, when it comes to supporting those who won't work or find work. I'm all for a system that helps people help themselves. I don't think we should get rid of it because then we're pretty much screwing those hardworking people who've fallen on hard times for whatever reason.
If someone has had something happen, and they need a little help, by all means give it to them. But, just so long as they show that they're working to get back to where they were, or become stable.
See? Again, I'm not a socialistic/communistic loony.
That would be unemployment insurance (many states pay for 13 weeks), food stamps, WIC, and welfare (in it's intended purpose) and a host of local programs. But the person needs to be responsible too. Set aside money for rough times and have a plan. Many will buy the X-box or plasma TV (or worse alcohol and cigarettes) first without regard for what might happen tomorrow. I don't think anyone on this site would suggest helping someone in trouble is socialist, but helping someone over and over who won't help themselves, to the detriment of people who are productive is.
An interesting counter-argument can be made that the majority of people do not participate in truly productive activity, and that by transporting to work, maintaining those facilities and so forth is counter-productive from an energy input/output standpoint. There are a massive number of people involved in producing useless objects that create waste during both consumption and production cycles. Further efficiency losses are found in the massive energy expenditures that are devoted to transactions of this nature. Planned obsolescence and just-in-time manufacturing are cornerstones of the frenzy of activity to which our country tends to engage itself. As energy supplies reach increasingly critical mass there are some interesting arguments and potentials for constructively disengaging the work force or redirecting it towards creation of greater utility products and infrastructure.
as mork would say "humor ar! ar! "
Do they tell you where your charity goes nationally? You are confused again. I suggest you read Animal farm (not the comic book version).
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
