What a bunch of clowns for 2016 candidates

How are you defending Bernie Sanders when his message is diametrically opposed to JFK's?

JFK - Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.

Bernie - Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country can do for you.

 

Well they wanted to try "democratic socialism" but inside every socialist is a totalitarian screaming to get out.

 

What exactly do you think Sanders "style" of socialism is? And no, they didn't. All of those were anti democratic revolutionaries.

 

No, they didn't even try or want too try it, stop spouting inflammatory nonsense. Democratic socialism pragmatically always entails some capitalism the way it is, because IT IS democratic and people always will want the right to own some of the tools of production on an individual basis. For an example look at Europe, mostly capitalist and social democrats are one of the most popular parties and have been for quite some time. Social liberty matters just as much as personal liberty.

 

Cruz, possibly the only one that understands the Constitution intimately. Of course that would be considered radical by the left.

 

Anyone who makes it in the "Discover the Networks" database has to be a radical leftist and a threat to America.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2266

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=2239

Where the Candidate Fits In

Where the candidate's Social score meets the Economic score on the grid below is the candidate's political philosophy. Based on the above score, the candidate is a Hard-Core Liberal. -> http://www.ontheissues.org/VoteMatc...a12=5&a13=1&i1=1&i2=1&i3=1&i4=1&p=95&e=5&t=21

 

Inside Every Liberal is a Totalitarian Screaming to Get Out

 

back during JFK, it was a very different America brother. Today, when top 1% owns more wealth than bottom 60%, we have RE-DISTRIBUTION but in REVERSE - UPWARDS. JFK would've absolutely gone more left in today's America.

 

Hitler this. Hitler that. What is your point? Socialism or communism doesn't repudiate private property. Never did. Hitler was a crazy racist. His views on the economy aside.

 

If JFK were alive today, he wouldn't recognize his own party. He would think it looked more like Khrushchev's Soviet Union.

 

True, the democrats actually used to be for the middle class. It may return to it's roots in the next election, possibly.

 

When the hell did Sanders ever say that? Have you heard his thing about asking people/giving infrastructure jobs? Doing something for your country. Same stuff.

 

His whole message is wealth redistribution. Taking away from people who have things and giving "free" stuff to everybody else. I think that sums up the position I attributed to him pretty well.

 

Not to burst your bubble, but that is only one of the issues he talked about. And JFK believed in the same thing. Redistribution of wealth. A marginal tax system. Taxes have always taken from people for public goods. Whats your point? The question is what should be a public good. That's where social democrats and conservatives differ.

 

The "public good" is a bull(*)(*)(*)(*) concept. It denies the well-being of the individual by lumping everyone together into some kind of collective borg. If your needs are at odds with the group, you're out of luck. And the Democrats will see you as a hindrance to their vision of progress.

 

I said public goods, not THE public good. Wow. Like Universal Healthcare, workers rights, guaranteed maternal leave... And if you want extra healthcare you can always pay more for an alternative private service, but everyone is guaranteed basic healthcare. Things like that. You are not out of luck, just people who can't afford basic healthcare will get it without owing thousands of dollars for life. These things guarantee individual well being. If you don't even agree with the idea of base public goods like police or the military, then why are you on a political forum? Without these things there is no state/government and thus no politics so why even say nonsense like the public good is a bull(*)(*)(*)(*) concept. It's basically the same as saying government is a bull(*)(*)(*)(*) concept.

 

lol, all three were part of Marxist revolutions designed to create a dictatorship of the proletariat from the beginning. Democratic Socialism was never the goal for any of them. You can criticize socialism without lying about it.

And yes, we are all familiar with the lazy canard of "inside every [insert group I don't like here] is a [insert desperate hyperbole here, because jingoism is a lot easier than real debate] screaming to get out."

Inside every religious conservative is a Jihadist waiting to get out.
Inside every conservative is an oligarchist screaming to get out.
Inside every libertarian is an anarchist screaming to get out.
etc., etc.

All shorthand for "I don't feel prepared or equipped to provide a real response, so I'll just make wild and intellectually lazy, dishonest comparisons instead."

 

Baloney. If that was the case there would never have been a revolution. But you could be talking about the USA of today where if you added up all the wealth and income and divided by 325,000,000 we don't look that bad. When you look a little deeper, you find that 5% of the population has 90% of the wealth.

 

Now you're just making (*)(*)(*)(*) up.

Hitler was a liberal aka nationalist socialist and democracy put the nationalist socialist into power. History has shown us that inside inside every liberal (socialist) is a totalitarian screaming to get out.

Having and using that pen and telephone is totalitarian.

 

Say, wasn't Reagan the guy who quadrupled the debt and sold weapons to Iran, a nation on the state sponsor of terrorism list? Wasn't he the guy who told Poindexter and North "do what you have to do, just don't tell me about it"? But I bet you like his "aww, shucks" demeanor, eh?

 

I'm sorry you are unfamiliar with the history of Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao, but they were fighting for a dictatorship of the proletariat (are you really that unfamiliar with Marxism that you don't know about the dictatorship of the proletariat?) from the beginning. That's kinda what Marxist communism is all about.

And the desperation deepens. Now we are throwing Hitler into the mix. As someone whose family actually suffered under Hitler, I'm a little tired of lazy arguments from both sides of the aisle trying to capitalize on the death and suffering of others in order to paint an ugly picture of their political opponents. It's sad to see these people do their premature victory dances on the graves of millions of people.

Yes, Hitler was elected . . . and? Being elected and being a socialist does not make you a Democratic Socialist. Democratic Socialism is an ideology, and anyone who is familiar with that ideology and who has actually read Hitler's own ideology can have a hearty chuckle at such a desperate reach.

In the exact same way that the same can be said of conservatives -- through absurd hyperbole

What are you talking about now?

 

I like your synopsis. But you didn't mention Kasich or Walker, governors who ran states and knows how to work with their state legislatures, both sides of the aisle. I think our present president has been below average and he will leave this nation in worst shape than when he took over. Although he has a year and 4 months left to do something about that. I doubt he will. One of Obama's weakness is he didn't and apparently still doesn't know how to work with congress.

He never talks to Republicans in congress and rarely talks to members of his own congressional party. He does not know how to use the phones and meeting with congress to get his agenda or at least parts of it passed. Instead he figures out ways to go around congress or bypass them completely.

In short it is hard to see how anyone can be more below average this our present president, but as the saying goes, "be careful what you wish for, you might get it." You may be right about most of those aspiring to take his place, they could very well be worse.

 

You sound like one of those losers in life that want all the wealth divided up among the population. Why would you bring it up? The 5% with 90% of the wealth deserve it if they earned it legally. Did you ever think they might be smarter than you? You do realize that the 5% you refer to probably pay more taxes to the U.S. treasury than the 90% you mention.
*The Top 50 Percent of All Taxpayers Paid 97 Percent of All Income Taxes; the Top 5 Percent Paid 57 Percent of All Income Taxes; and the Top 1 Percent Paid 35 Percent of All Income Taxes in 2011

 

Sound familiar ? It should.

All of you radicals were at one time under one red flag but you splinter into factions, different tactics but always the same goal.



Sorry your family suffered under Hitler but My father and two of my uncles were preoccupied in the Pacific killing Japs, one uncle was KIA in New Guinea. But my other four uncles were in Europe dealing with Hitler, two were WIA. Sorry they were slow getting over there but back before Comrade Hitler attacked Comrade Stalin, CPUSA was getting it's orders from the Kremlin and their orders were to keep the USA out of the war and to keep war supplies from reaching England.

You Democrat Socialist really did a job to the Democrat Party, JFK wouldn't even recognize it today.
The socialist use affirmative action to get one of there own in the White House and who do they put in the White House ? A freaking community organizer.
Hasn't worked out to well has it ?
Why not try Bernie Sanders.

 

If Obama ran against this field today he'd get his butt kicked.

And a socialist is "probably the best of the whole bunch"? Thanks for the laugh.