RNC : Bush Is A Socialist !!!!!!!!!!
- Thread starter Facetious
- Start date
Will E Worm
Conspiracy...
Democracy leads to Socialism leads to Communism which always leads to
Fascist Totalitarianism.
Our ego driven nature does in a way like that.
Whatever you said right, Communist Parties became only rulers (no democracy). If a piece freedom was installed in old USSR sytem and greed for power was also removed, USSR would be alive and kicking ass today. They made the system change in 1917 in terminal velocity.
So, I presume you don't vote, Will E ?? I mean, really, why take the USA even one step closer to fascist totalitarianism if you don't have to?
:dunno:
" That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. "
" But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. "
- Declaration of Independence
With todays government, I find myself looking at what the Founding Fathers wrote for generations of Americans and wonder... did they see their ideals becoming corrupted? Giving permission to Americans to correct the course of democracy to what it always should be... by the people for the people?
I want to think so... our government has become/is corrupt. No longer is it by the people for the people. It has become - on the backs of the poor and ruled, for the privileged and entitled.
Whether Bush is a socialist is not a concern to me, its what our government is slowly doing to us, the people. THAT is what concerns me.
Unfortunately our government has instituted a ruling elite and we let it go cause we are more concerned about who won the effing football game on Monday night and what drugs Lindsay Lohan is doing than what is happening in the world of politics. We are more concerned about hugging a tree, selling a stock, or buying some bauble than figuring out what is best for us. We say there are others who do this for us and we don't need to worry about that. We say they have our interests at heart. NO! NO THEY DON'T. They are human like the rest of us, and they care about making money and staying in power.
Our Representational Government has failed us, they have failed because we the people have failed to be good stewards of our political system. We have failed because we are complacent.
Some of you may say I'm a nut or whatever... but if you look at whats happening, open your eyes, you just may finally see.
" But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. "
- Declaration of Independence
With todays government, I find myself looking at what the Founding Fathers wrote for generations of Americans and wonder... did they see their ideals becoming corrupted? Giving permission to Americans to correct the course of democracy to what it always should be... by the people for the people?
I want to think so... our government has become/is corrupt. No longer is it by the people for the people. It has become - on the backs of the poor and ruled, for the privileged and entitled.
Whether Bush is a socialist is not a concern to me, its what our government is slowly doing to us, the people. THAT is what concerns me.
Unfortunately our government has instituted a ruling elite and we let it go cause we are more concerned about who won the effing football game on Monday night and what drugs Lindsay Lohan is doing than what is happening in the world of politics. We are more concerned about hugging a tree, selling a stock, or buying some bauble than figuring out what is best for us. We say there are others who do this for us and we don't need to worry about that. We say they have our interests at heart. NO! NO THEY DON'T. They are human like the rest of us, and they care about making money and staying in power.
Our Representational Government has failed us, they have failed because we the people have failed to be good stewards of our political system. We have failed because we are complacent.
Some of you may say I'm a nut or whatever... but if you look at whats happening, open your eyes, you just may finally see.
1st off I think people should stop using words like socialism and communism interchangibly.All modern forms of govt are somewhat socialistic to one degree or another but that is not the same as being communist at least as we use the word.I think it is very clear that most americans are thinking more socialism is needed given what has happened with the hands off deregulation policys that the republicans expoused has led too.As the funny little "clapper" vid put up by facial king illustrated we have socialism for when it's needed to save these corporations in bad times.Loses are socialized but in good times profits and actions by these entities are totally private is just not acceptable.The world, the country are all just way too intertwined and connected now to just allow them to operate unregulated with no consideration of the effect on society they have.We are suppose to all be in the same boat as they say and we are.If we ALL are good enough to be part of bail outs with our taxes used to save private entitys ,which I support as we ALL are dependant on the economy and not allowing these entities to collapse which would affect ALL of us.Key word in all this is "ALL" and yes that means socialism to some degree. Providing public schools is socialistic is one example,maybe some think providing education that way is a bad idea ,but they are a small minority.It is in society's interest to provide education so we do.Just as it is in society's interest to provide quality affordable health care for all,we just haven't gotten to that yet in the US like the rest of developed world has but we are moving that way and it will come.Too bad we are slow learners on some things and some suffer in the mean time.
And on this crazy idea that demcoracy leads to socialism then communism then fascism.Lets look at that.First as Facial pointed out what would you do abolish democracy and go straight to a dictatorship? And as I said all forms of govt democratic or not have some socialism in them like schools and other govt services.
And for the live of me I can't think of one democracy that ever became a communist country.A few became fascist like Germany and Italy.Not that I think democracy caused that really or that the whole analogy has any validity.
And to just comment on a couple earlier posts that try to analyze where and how the republicans got where they are.In one it was said the republicans need to get back to the old conservative stuff they used to push.Low taxes for you know who ,strong defense etc etc etc and stop trying to become more centrist ,I hope they take that advice so we aren't bothered by them again lol.
And in another post it was said the republicans lost due to losing their base which is not true at all.They lost the last couple elections because they are not attracting those centrist moderate independents that always decide elections.Bases do not desert parties as they have nowhere to g
ne example I will give is many in the gay community and others right now are upset at Obama for having a certain preacher at his inaguaration.But the dems and Obama are not in any real danger of losing these peoples support,what are they going to do, vote for republicans? Not likely.
And on this crazy idea that demcoracy leads to socialism then communism then fascism.Lets look at that.First as Facial pointed out what would you do abolish democracy and go straight to a dictatorship? And as I said all forms of govt democratic or not have some socialism in them like schools and other govt services.
And for the live of me I can't think of one democracy that ever became a communist country.A few became fascist like Germany and Italy.Not that I think democracy caused that really or that the whole analogy has any validity.
And to just comment on a couple earlier posts that try to analyze where and how the republicans got where they are.In one it was said the republicans need to get back to the old conservative stuff they used to push.Low taxes for you know who ,strong defense etc etc etc and stop trying to become more centrist ,I hope they take that advice so we aren't bothered by them again lol.
And in another post it was said the republicans lost due to losing their base which is not true at all.They lost the last couple elections because they are not attracting those centrist moderate independents that always decide elections.Bases do not desert parties as they have nowhere to g
ne example I will give is many in the gay community and others right now are upset at Obama for having a certain preacher at his inaguaration.But the dems and Obama are not in any real danger of losing these peoples support,what are they going to do, vote for republicans? Not likely.Ok, so you got Stalin and Mao in there are socialist turned fascist states. But Hitler? Sure, Hitler was affiliated with the National Socialist Workers Party, but they were really more trade unionists than commies, but I'll give you that one. I think most people would agree that Hitler merely sought support from populist and fringe groups (such as the brownshirts, a right-wing militant group more like the NRA than the ACLU) in order to gain political power, than because he shared their ideologies. It's fairly apparent in the fact that his policies were not socialist and he attacked communists even prior to his role as leader, and his invasion against Stalinist Russia. So the pretense of Hitler as a political socialist seems pretty off base.
and what about Mussolini? He pretty much embodied the term Fascist, and he was a capitalist, or rather a corporatist, not a socialist or communist. And what about Spain's Franco? He used the military to overthrow the monarchist government, and his chief opponents where the socialists, communists and anarchists.
add into that groups likes the Taliban, Ayatollah, even Saddan Huessain, Somalia, and the many African war lords, Noriega,... it seems to me that leftist/socialist/communists actually make up the minority of the Facist/ Totalitarian rulers in world history.
you guys are more worried about the people that want to give away your money than the ones that want to take it and keep it for themselves. how does that make sense?
and what about Mussolini? He pretty much embodied the term Fascist, and he was a capitalist, or rather a corporatist, not a socialist or communist. And what about Spain's Franco? He used the military to overthrow the monarchist government, and his chief opponents where the socialists, communists and anarchists.
add into that groups likes the Taliban, Ayatollah, even Saddan Huessain, Somalia, and the many African war lords, Noriega,... it seems to me that leftist/socialist/communists actually make up the minority of the Facist/ Totalitarian rulers in world history.
you guys are more worried about the people that want to give away your money than the ones that want to take it and keep it for themselves. how does that make sense?
Friday and Calpoon, you two seem to be intelligent individuals... how would you assess OUR governmental situation and what would you do to correct it?
Ok, here's my quote:
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest."
- Generally considered to be a reworking of Diderot echoing an earlier expression by Meslier.
Although I would amend it to include all of the high ranking CEO's and government officials.
So maybe you'd be better off going with Fri's answer.
Ok, here's my quote:
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest."
- Generally considered to be a reworking of Diderot echoing an earlier expression by Meslier.
Although I would amend it to include all of the high ranking CEO's and government officials.
So maybe you'd be better off going with Fri's answer.
I would strongly agree with that.
Friday and Calpoon, you two seem to be intelligent individuals... how would you assess OUR governmental situation and what would you do to correct it?
Well I did rep you earlier for your other long post on how our system is and has been broken for some time and I agree with that.It has happened as you say because of complacency.Whether its fixable or not is a big question which I do not claim to have the answer to.It may have to fall and we start over.
And to calpoon I would say your answer is probably not far from what may (and have to) happen.Something along the lines of the French revolution may be required.
Facetious
Moderated
On the monetary front, bush not only leaves the nations finances in shambles, he has set a bad example for his successor.
I had this bad dream the other night . . . Assuming that America survives this current greatest bank heist known to mankind . . . never again will a two term Presidential administration exit the Office of the Presidency without raiding the treasury, prior.
. . and why not, there's no accountability. :dunno:
And on what to do about "our" government, if I may ?
Absolutely nothing. After all, it's internationalized. we're trapped !
the fed gov is selling tax payer paid infrastructure i.e. roads, bridges & highways etc. to foreign interests.
Who ya gonna call ?
I had this bad dream the other night . . . Assuming that America survives this current greatest bank heist known to mankind . . . never again will a two term Presidential administration exit the Office of the Presidency without raiding the treasury, prior.
. . and why not, there's no accountability. :dunno:
And on what to do about "our" government, if I may ?
Absolutely nothing. After all, it's internationalized. we're trapped !
the fed gov is selling tax payer paid infrastructure i.e. roads, bridges & highways etc. to foreign interests.
Who ya gonna call ?
I had asked what you would do because I honestly wanted to know your opinions. What we have only begun to discuss is to some on the same level of importance as breathing. Our Founding Fathers were jaded by a government that ruled with impunity. I can only hope that someday, others will have the same courage.
Facetious
Moderated
Thank You :tongue::dunno:
I think it was Plato that came up with that idea. That is the meaning of the political use of Revolution, Eg., to wind up back again at it's starting point.
Which is why I don't agree with Ron paul. he wants a revolution, I want evolution.
Comrade Bush now stands left of Chavez.
In the same regard ...
There was an interesting election and related set of recounts in the Pacific Northwest. The phrase "recount until the Democrat wins" came about because when yet a fourth recount caused the Democrat to win, they stopped and blocked any further recounts which would include several considerations the Republicans were asking for.
In reality, we're talking 1-3% difference in the popular vote in the majority of elections. Hell, even Bill Clinton only got 44% in 1992, as most of America did not want him. In other words, I don't see the point here, especially when it comes to only 44-52% of Americans wanting someone.
Let's focus on the actual actions and results.
People keep using that as an excuse. In the same regard, Gore didn't "win" either.
There was an interesting election and related set of recounts in the Pacific Northwest. The phrase "recount until the Democrat wins" came about because when yet a fourth recount caused the Democrat to win, they stopped and blocked any further recounts which would include several considerations the Republicans were asking for.
In reality, we're talking 1-3% difference in the popular vote in the majority of elections. Hell, even Bill Clinton only got 44% in 1992, as most of America did not want him. In other words, I don't see the point here, especially when it comes to only 44-52% of Americans wanting someone.
Let's focus on the actual actions and results.
