Here is another good youtube, this one is on the appeasement debate.
Great You Tube ad - pass it on to everyone who thinks about voting for McCain.
"pass it on to everyone who thinks about voting for McCain."
You mean everyone who thinks electing an American hating communist is a bad idea?
Damn right skippy! I haven't voted for a Republican since Ronald Reagan and I wish the Republicans had picked a better choice than McCain, but it'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for a man you calls a pedophile, KGB propagandist and leader of the Communist Party USA his friend and mentor, has Cuban flags and Che Guevara posters hanging in his campaign offices and employees CPUSA members on his campaign staff.
MCCain sure ain't perfect but he's not a full-blown Marxist like Obama is either. No brainer who's getting my vote.
wow! did we just travel back in time! Obama is a commie? Did gene mccarhty tell you that? Maybe J. Edgar?
http://www.postgazette.com/pg/08.../883122-
100.stm
Rendell is talking about 8.5% return on those proceeds. That seems pretty aggressive assumptions for tax payers money. Considering US 30 year treasuries are yielding 4.5% the 10 year at @ 3.81%. I am not sure if he is talking about real returns or nominal. But that sounds like a lot of equity in that portfolio to hit that bogey.
"wow! did we just travel back in time! Obama is a commie? Did gene mccarhty tell you that? Maybe J. Edgar?"
Of course he's not a commie; everybody's best friends, associates, pastors and mentors are open commies. Everyone who runs for president has communists lining up to run their campaign offices, run their blogs and volunteer for them and has communist flags, posters and Soviet style propaganda adorning their offices. Everyone chums around with terrorists, has people with links to terrorist groups advising and working on their campaign takes part in "secret" meetings with terrorist apologists.
Yeah he's so not a commie that the people who are at least honest enough to admit their beliefs and identify themselves as communists are throwing their support behind him because they really think he's a freedom loving capitalist.
Even the commies know he's own of their own anyone who can't see that Barack Obama is full blown Marxist with a thin veneer of campaign B.S. applied just before he decided to run for President is either an complete idiot or one of those trying to help deceive the electorate.
Communist, 100% no ifs ands or buts about it.
Tin foil hats never go out of style.
That's about as thorough a recusal from sensible debate as I have observed recently.
Fortunately for everyone, including Paul, his concerns are likely to be be revealed as delusions when Democrats swamp Republicans in November and our nation emerges the better for it.
If Paul wishes to reestablish a reality-based orbit, he might start by reviewing U.S. conduct with respect to Libya and Iran-Contra (why meet with terrorist apologists when you can do business with the real thing)? Or considering the "freedom-loving" aspects of issues such as the War on Drugs, gay rights, flag-burning and censorship of adult videos.
I guess the Republicans are going after Obama by labeling him a Marxist, so they can duck the charge of racism.
Ed, I believe Obama is the racist. Attending a racist church and listening to a racist preacher for over 20 years and contributing thousands of dollars a year to that church and its preacher? Cut me a break. You don't do that unless you believe that theology.
I'd vote for a black person, just not this black person.. a Conservative black (Ken Blackwell, JC Watts, etal). I would have no problem if McCain would choose a black Conservative as his VP candidate. Then, let's see how much fun it'll be with the MSM and the racist Democrats attacking a black candidate.. and the black voter response.
Weren't black churches a reaction to white-imposed (make that church-attending-God-fearing-pillar-of-the-
community-white-imposed-by-force-of-law) segregation?
So . . . when white racists finally got the word from God that it was now OK to let people worship among them even if they had differently pigmented skin, the black churchgoers were to quit their churches and start fresh in the formerly oppressive churches?
Actually, some of them did. The whites somehow never seem to have gotten around to trying the black churches much, though.
And black liberation theology doesn't strike me as any more objectionable than the dogma (or conduct) of most churches. Of course, I've never been a big fan of 'my fairy tale beats your fairy tale' arguments. Besides, should we really hold someone's choice of Sunday morning entertainment against him? I mean, what kind of person would attend a church that has been revealed to have recently been the largest systematic concealer and facilitator of child sexual abuse in American history? And what kind of political party would put enough such pedophile-sympathizers on the Supreme Court to form a majority?
Just wondering.
"I guess the Republicans are going after Obama by labeling him a Marxist, so they can duck the charge of racism."
Nobody's labeling Obama anything, he is what he is and just because he's managed to dupe a few clods like you with campaign rhetoric doesn't obligate anyone else to ignore his past.
People can call themselves "progressives" or whatever they want to maintain their little game of self-denial but a Marxist it what it is and there's no getting around it.
Obama's Global Poverty Act tells you everything you need to know about his fundamental beliefs and if you can't see Marx's hand in that bit of legislation it's only because you don't want to.
The truly sad and pathetic thing about Obama supporters is that they're either completely unaware of what the guy stands for aside from what they've heard during this campaign or they're totally aware and will lie through their teeth in order to deceive voters... and what does it say about Obama and his supporters that outright deceit about who and what they are is the only chance they have to win an election.
"Did gene mccarhty tell you that?"
Comments like this only belie you ignorance on the subject - you should pick up a copy of "The Secret World of American Communism" and educate yourself. With access to Soviet archives of the KGB and the CPUSA after the collapse of the Soviet Union it documents that McCarthy was right about everyone of his claims and even names US Senators, Congressmen and other politicians who were being paid by the KGB to advance Soviet interests.
"when Democrats swamp Republicans in November and our nation emerges the better for it."
You know what they say about being careful what you wish for and the dangers of believing your own propaganda?
While lear-jet leftists chatter amongst themselves how wonderful an Obama victory will be - guns and ammo are flying off the shelves in every part of the country in anticipation of the event.
Barack Obama will drive a wedge into the nation like nobody ever has - you can bet your last dollar on it.
When a communist sits in the White House, the nation will be forever changed in the worst possible ways imaginable.
Guns and ammo?
Guns and ammo?
For what purpose are big-mouthed, tiny-testicled right-wing nuts stocking up on guns and ammo?
To defend their barricaded homes against the Mad Max-style devastation that will arise when our society is no longer able to rely on the leadership of Bush Jr.?
To take to militia meetings for pathetic impersonations of the Blues Brothers' nemesis?
To prepare for potshots at the liberals and Democrats and RINOs about to assume leadership?
To assassinate the new leaders of the United States government?
To shed your chickenhawk feathers and head to Iraq (OK, OK, we all know that one is just a joke)?
Or just to fuel your fantasies about taking out the black guy who has accomplished more in just about every year of his adult life than you two-bit losers could hope to accomplish in an entire life? I don't expect you to be able process this information, but the most likely reason for your inappropriate rage is that a President Obama would deprive you and plenty of other racist losers of the comfort of being able to feel entitled to look down on someone. It's a shabby comfort, but it probably is about all you've got.
Keep your crackpot boasts and delusions to yourself. If you must vocalize your stupidity, keep it to a mumble. That will suit you perfectly, because muttering bitterly and irrelevantly about good old days that never existed is the natural state for most far-right nuts.
Lear-jet neocons are the only ones left chattering amongst themselves about how wonderful Bush's victory has been for their bank accounts. Our nation's money flying off the supermarket shelves in every part of the country in a vain attempt to revenge Saddam's dissing George's daddy.
All that lovely money, all those delicious homes in town and country, all those trophy wives and FUVs and all those Skull & Bones reunions. The joke is their ragged attempt to stick Obama with the 'elite' tag.
George Bush already drove the mother of all wedges into the nation like nobody ever has. Barack, Hillary, Edwards, Kerry, hell just about anyone I could name, could serve ten back to back terms as President and never reach Bush's unparalleled achievement of so disastrously dividing my beloved country.
Well, KGC, consider the history of the black experience in America. At least try to see that there is more than one side to that issue. You would consider voting for a black person, as long as they are a good black person who thinks like a conservative? That's your absolute right, but it is basing your vote on your percetion of the quality of a man's thought colored (so to speak) by his skin tone.
Paul, am I supposed to be persuaded by being called a clod? Marxism, once fairly popular around the world, has now been largely passed over by history. China is still fairly totalitarian, but no longer worships at the alter of Mao, now they just want to be rich, much like the Russians. As for The Secret World of American Communism, it is hard to get a handle on its level of scholarship, but clearly some people are very convinced by it. Actually, it would not surprise to learn that the Soviets were trying to actively destabilize us in the 1950’s and 1960’s, as much as we were trying to do them. I haven’t read the book, but I will say that actors and directors were probably not much of a threat to us, although there could well have been cells of considerable numbers of would be saboteurs.
Meanwhile, I don’t know anything about the progress of the Global Poverty Act through Congress. Maybe it will pass. Trying to help poor people who live on a dollar a day around the world. Maybe it is Marxist, but it sounds more Christian to me. Not “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” so much as how can we do more to help. Do you have further proof of Obama being a communist? Did he pick that up being the President of the Law Review at Harvard? Is your evidence on websites that don’t have viruses, or pornography advertisements (like the sites that seem most interested in “The Secret World of American Communism”)?
"Meanwhile, I don’t know anything about the progress of the Global Poverty Act through Congress. Maybe it will pass. Trying to help poor people who live on a dollar a day around the world."
It's not the stated objective of the bill that's the problem it's the method employed to do it that's the problem - mandating a percentage of the US GDP be turned over to the UN - that's right out of the far left's playbook.
Even the most prolific of Christian charities the Catholic Church has rejected the ideas of liberation theology, declared that Socialism & Communism are inherently incompatible with Catholicism and Christian belief based on the belief that using evil means to achieve is unacceptable.
Meeting the needs of the poor is supposed to be done our of concern and love for them not forced at the end of gun aimed at the working class by the government.
History has shown that when bureaucrats take by force the product of an individuals labor claiming to do so in order to help the poor, the goals are rarely if ever achieved and resentment and/or antipathy toward the needs of the recipients is the result.
Look at the emergence of the ghetto culture and dramatic increases in the rate and depth of poverty that have come AFTER the Great Society programs and the "War on Poverty" if you have any doubt.
"For what purpose are big-mouthed, tiny-testicled right-wing nuts stocking up on guns and ammo?
No you pasty faced, limp wristed, sucking at the government teat, never contributed a meaningful thing to society in your life leftist... they're not buying them for any of the things you noted.
They're buying them in preparation for the inevitable result of Obama's command and control economic theories will be... The next Great Depression that will eclipse all before it.
When gasoline is selling for $8 a gallon as a result of "cap and trade," when millions of health care jobs have been shed to control costs and unemployment is approaching twenty percent, when the stock market has collapsed and GDP has contracted to fractions of what they are today due to the confiscatory tax rates he supports and the dollar is worth less than the paper it's printed on as a result of the seventy two trillion in debt accumulated by Social Security & Medicare and the trillions in new money they'll try to print to spend their way out of their mess...
Crackie McWelfare is still going expect you to support him and buy his drugs for him - even if he has to kick in your door to get it from you. Good luck trying to stop him with your good intentions and understanding.
And if you think that's just some fringe view held by right-wingers and rednecks think again. In the past four months I personally assisted half a dozen highly educated (from the best business schools in the countries) wealth managers, investment advisers and physicians - men and women who've never owned a firearm in their lives, purchase and learn how to shoot AK-47s and AR-15s and stock up on ammo, food and bottled water in preparation for a possible Obama victory.
If you think my experience is unique just stop into a gun dealer and ask them how sales are going and who's doing the buying. And the next time you read an article by some leftist writer who is confounded by the fact that despite rising gas prices people are still abandoning the cities and moving to the suburbs consider that many of them are just wise enough to be running from ground zero.
This ain't the thirties buddy when people had a notion of self-sufficiency and strong notion of right and wrong. It's the twenty first century where half of the country thinks their entitled to take the property of the other half by force. So buckle up cause it's going to be a bumpy ride.
Hey, no one says that the domestic poverty programs of the US are perfect, often not even good. But let's try to remember that conservatives and liberals have taken turns in shaping poverty programs, jamming in paternalistic rules that just make economists sick.
I was reading one website that suggested that the Global Poverty Act is supposed to be administered by our state department. One thing it is supposed to do is rationalize our debt forgiveness programs, and essentially compell us to look at the needs of the recipient nation, instead of gearing our donated aid to security or other considerations. But they may have been lying to me.
So you say donating a percentage of your income to a cause or institution is a page out of the far left's playbook, anonymous? Like that ultra liberal, practically communist institution the Catholic Church?
What's funny is that the only time widespread violence has erupted in American cities was during the race riots, Like in Watts in 1965 when African Americans got tired of being deliberately targed for further discrimination and racial profiling. Mybe it did get worse after the Great Society (which was just starting then), but I think that slavery and then segregation was actually no picnic. At the very least, the Great Socety (and the Civil Rights movement) has focused attention that was not otherwise being paid to the problems of African American. We had a hundred years after the Civil War to voluntarily help African Americans, and we did nothing.
"But let's try to remember that conservatives and liberals have taken turns in shaping poverty programs, jamming in paternalistic rules that just make economists sick."
Would a true "conservative" ever take part in such an effort? Beside the point though; exactly right Ed, bureaucracies fail regardless of who's in charge of them and why people continue to believe that turning over necessities like health care to a bureaucracy will benefit them is beyond them.
"So you say donating a percentage of your income to a cause or institution is a page out of the far left's playbook, anonymous? Like that ultra liberal, practically communist institution the Catholic Church?"
Ah yes Orwell warned us didn't he. I know our friends on the left like to confuse with words, like calling taxes "contributions" and government spending "investment," but there's a difference between a donation to an institution and a seizure by force of someone's money by the institution.
What's being proposed is not a donation by and stretch of the imagination.
"At the very least, the Great Socety (and the Civil Rights movement) has focused attention that was not otherwise being paid to the problems of African American."
Funny how our collective recollection of those events fails to included the fact that the leaders of those movements (like Martin Luther King Jr) were Republicans who warned against the corrosive affects of dependency on the individual and the threat that a false sense of entitlement would pose to our freedoms.
"There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs-partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."
Booker T. Washington
anon 8:41 isn't the only person with first hand experience with what they described. here at the hospital an informal in the closet club of doctors, nurses, administrators and other educated professionals has sprung up in response to a possible obama victory. conversations about assault weapon purchases, financial advisers telling them to start moving their assets to cash and tobuy silver and gold and one doctor who moved his family out of their point breeze home before selling it because of it's proximity to penn ave are pretty much the topic of conversation most days for the past two months. anyone who thinks obama is going to unite anyone is fooling themselves because i hear mostly angst and worry about the economy in a post obama victory.
If doctors and nurses are worried that an Obama presidency would be half as bad as the Bush presidency has been, I guess standards for admission to the medical professions have declined greatly.
And anyone who thinks an assault rifle and a couple of cases of biscuits will be adequate preparation for a societal meltdown is delusional.
And which part of the Catholic Church's systematic, decades-long facilitation and concealment of child sex abusers (coupled with its vigorous legal victimization of those who complained) recommends that church as a moral authority these days? When the words "Catholic" and "prolific" are used together these days, the natural thought is "immoral crime," not "charity."
Buckle in, wingnuts. You're in for a severe period of cognitive dissonance.
"If doctors and nurses are worried that an Obama presidency would be half as bad as the Bush presidency has been, I guess standards for admission to the medical professions have declined greatly."
Anyone who works in a hospital, or any related health care industry, knows first hand how many of their peers are from foreign countries and work here in the US because there are no jobs in their socialized systems.
Of course it remains to be seen what if any plan to provide universal coverage gets pass but you can rest assured there will be job losses and it's only a question of how many.
Anyone who believes that health care and pharmaceutical industries will continue to add jobs post universal coverage is basing that belief on economic theories that rely heavily on doses of LSD.
The American middle class is as close to extinction with Obama as President as it ever has been.
well infinonymous, one thing is for sure, somebody will survive and the the odds that assault weapon owners who are prepared will be counted in that group and non-gun owners - well rats and roaches gotta eat too i suppose.
really now, is there a shortage of examples throughout history of what happens to people who rely on governments for their existence?
though the more i read of your posts i'm starting to think there might be an upside to a obama triggered meltdown; we're way over due for a culling of the weak and stupid hanger-ons in this country so perhaps a world with a lot fewer infinonymouses might just be worth the pain.
The amounts of stupid and fear-mongering in these comments makes reading feedback at the National Review Online seem like an exercise in sane rational thought. I wish I could bother to post some sort of factual rebuttal, but people who assume that an Obama victory in November will lead to complete social breakdown, are not interested in facts, or even rationality.
Oh, and if you're using Orwell to reference liberals and "Double Speak," which the Bush Admin. has taken to extreme new heights of absurd use, then you are doing it very, very wrong.
Republican policies -- such as disdain for the estate task to the point of proposing that work be taxed more than inheritance -- threaten the middle class at least as much as any Democratic policy.
The economy is broader than the health care (including pharmaceutical) sector. Some economists argue that political featherbedding for the lobbyist-rich pharmaceutical industry is a drag on our general economy. I sense that separating health insurance from the employment relationship would be an overall stimulus to employment, although perhaps not for drug reps and dermatologists.
I doubt that a pallet of bottled water, a closetful of canned tuna and an assault weapon will provide a defense for more than a few days of the apocalypse. Wouldn't those who had not become rich from government programs and policies (such as physicians and defense contractors) simply burn down those multi-million-dollar homes during a calamity?
I am not worried, because I have faith in the American system of government, the American economy and the American people. If we can survive eight years of George Bush Jr., we are far more resilient than the end-is-near crowd believes.
Why do those America-is-weak folks hate our country so? Are they really that worked up over whether two gay guys want to have a ceremony and swap rings, or whether a college kid smokes a doobie, or whether a woman decides not to let a three-hour blastocyst develop into a child?
"Buckle in, wingnuts. You're in for a severe period of cognitive dissonance."
Really us? hmmm, so the Democrats get their wish and the US halts buying oil to add to the Strategic Reserve and the rice per barrel ... hits another record high today.
Any more bright ideas Nancy, Harry and Jason? Maybe you might want to investigate that whole SUPPLY and demand thing.
I don't know about anyone else but I just can't wait for $8 gasoline woo hoo!
About the only thing worse than $8 gasoline would be spending $2 or $3 trillion as the cost of invading the wrong country (and electing the wrong president).
If you voted for Bush Jr., about the only thing most Americans want to hear from you is, "I apologize." Except for the squandered soldiers . . . they no longer care what you have to say in defense of yourself.
"About the only thing worse than $8 gasoline would be spending $2 or $3 trillion as the cost of invading the wrong country (and electing the wrong president)."
*YAWN* you do realize that you're amongst a shrinking minority of people who put that issue ahead of their economic futures swirling the drain while Congressional leadership prances around on the end of a leash held by George Soros and Maurice Strong.
Is Nancy responsible for rices oil prices around the globe?
Close your eyes to these facts too.
http://fuelfocus.nrcan.gc.ca/
pri...es_byyear_e.cfm
http://www.whatcar.com/news-arti....aspx?
NA=231742
Let's catalog those who rely on the government for their existence.
Physicians. They fought Medicaid and Medicare . . . then saw their incomes increase enormously from the separation from the consumer of their services and the funder. They are subsidized by deductibility of employer health care payments. They drive Hummers for the ridiculous special tax deductions.
Defense contractors (war profiteers). They lobby relentlessly for contracts, then overbill the government, duck taxes by routing employees through an off-shore scam, and provide inadequate equipment to our troops -- all at cost-plus.
Pharmaceutical industry workers. They lobby to prevent marketplace pricing for their wares. They fight to exploit intellectual property laws. Also, see: government-funded healthcare.
Heirs. When Republicans are in control of tax policy, inheritance is taxed more favorably than work.
Churches. They don't pay taxes, even on alcohol sales and gambling. They get hundreds of millions of dollars in government handouts for the likes of the "Silver Ring Thing" and anti-science propaganda.
I agree -- we need to look carefully at plenty of people who rely on government-supplied advantages.
*YAWN* you do realize that you're amongst a shrinking minority of people who put that issue ahead of their economic futures swirling the drain..."
Good thing there's no connection between the two issues. None-at-all. Just look away, Citizen as we decide to change talking points that divert attention away from every wrong we've spent the past seven years perpetrating on you.
The level of cognitive dissonance is staggering. Do you even recognize this?
Do you realize that most Americans are eager to entrust that economic future to the Democrats, and that Bush Jr. has worn out his welcome like no other president in recorded history of disapproval ratings?
And those who place economic issues above the issue of American soldiers (and Iraqi civilians) dying needlessly in a vain effort to vindicate discredited ideology miss the moral mark, in my view. It's understandable that right-wingers want to redirect attention away from that issue, but yawning won't help . . . although it might be a natural way to start what is setting up to be an eight-year nap for Republicans.
"Do you realize that most Americans are eager to entrust that economic future to the Democrats, and that Bush Jr. has worn out his welcome like no other president in recorded history of disapproval ratings?"
Really? Haven't checked Congresses or Nancy and Harry's approval ratings lately have you?
Ten and eleven percent respectively.
"Ten and eleven percent respectively."
Yeah, but that includes all the people who are angry at them for not de-funding the war and commencing impeachment proceedings already.
I'm fascinated -- are gun & ammo sales really spiking due to fears about an Obama presidency? Sounds like a job for the City Paper.
Well, remember that a hundred miles to the north is militia country. Their heads are probably exploding at the thought of Obama getting elected.
Americans prefer Democratic leadership to Republican leadership across the board on issues presented . . . from the economy to Iraq to taxes to health care to corruption to safeguarding our freedoms.
Every major part presidential candidate has a chance six months out, but McCain faces exceptionally rough headwinds (mostly because of his predecessor and his Republican colleagues rather than because of anything he did or said). And in the House and Senate? Democrats should stock up on popcorn and Penn Pilsner for election night. It should be entertaining.
"Democrats should stock up on popcorn and Penn Pilsner for election night. It should be entertaining."
Would that include Joe Lieberman, Ed Koch and Geraldine Ferraro - the three most recent prominent Democrats to state publicly they may support McCain over Obama?
You may be in for a real shock at how many Democrats aren't prepared to move as far to left as you hope.
"Well, remember that a hundred miles to the north is militia country."
None of the people I know who are making the purchases live that far away... all the people I've helped buy and learn to shoot are extremely educated, moderate to liberal residents of Squirrel Hill and Shadyside.
They're the ones looking across Penn and Centre Avenues and expecting the worst.
Us country bumpkins north and south of the city have always had plenty of guns and ammo.
David Brooks has a column in today's NYTimes defending McCain and blasting Obama, because McCain opposed the farm bill and Obama voted for it. I don't know how many farmers there are in Arizona, but McCain is safe in exercising his outrage at the fleecing of the AMerican public, even as Obama has to be mindful of Illinois farmers. But the point is well made, Obama never claimed to be perfect and is manifestly not. He is, at best, a slightly better choice than the other two. McCain clearly believes in morality (I believe he is very religious), but he never the less screwed around at Annapolis, and had an affair with his current (second) wife. Plus he is starting to make Reagan-like memory mistakes.
"I'm fascinated -- are gun & ammo sales really spiking due to fears about an Obama presidency? Sounds like a job for the City Paper."
Indeed it's happening all across the country - just one example....
http://www.kidk.com/news/local/1...l/
16968331.html
Sportsman's Warehouse, Gander Mountain and Cabellas are national chains that have reported year over last guns sale increases of between thirty and forty five percent and ammo sales increases of eighteen and twenty five percent.
Well, I think we've finally found some of those 28 percent who gave Bush a positive approval rating, right here on the Burgh Report. Nice.
So how is Obama a marxist again? If you regularly watch Fox News and listen to Sean Hannity and/or Rush Limbaugh on the radio I have news for you - Obama's plan is not socialized medicine. It is not a true universal single payer health care plan like the one in Canada or Great Britain. Obama's plan is actually a hybrid - the private insurance market will still exist, but for those who cannot get private insurance through their employer, or who cannot afford an individual private insurance plan, there will be an option to enroll in the Government plan, the same plan that is used by members of Congress. The government will subsidize the cost of this plan, just like it does for Medicare, but I don't see the big deal here since the tax breaks to oil companies like Exxon, and the billions we are spending in Iraq could be diverted to pay for a national plan. (Here is a great analysis on Obama's plan by a guy who is a single payer advocate. )
We're spending more than $100 billion a year in Iraq, which is the estimated annual cost of Obama's plan. If we spend $100 billion a year on our citizens's instead of an endless war I don't see how that is socialism.
If anything, the ongoing Iraq War and your accusations of socialism aimed at Obama and his supporters, who care about the health and wellbeing of average American citizens, is facism.
So, I'm with Obama on healthcare. I want affordable health care for all Americans. I want my sister to not have to be forced into bankruptcy and lose her house because she has an unknown illness that requires numerous trips to the doctors and hospitals, and she cannot keep up with the co-payments. So, yeah, I care about the health of all American citizens. I guess that makes me a socialist, just like Obama.
"So how is Obama a marxist again? If you regularly watch Fox News and listen to Sean Hannity and/or Rush Limbaugh on the radio I have news for you - Obama's plan is not socialized medicine."
Oh goodness gracious how dumb are you man?
Obama's "plan," now which one would that be the one he's talking about on the campaign trail or the plans he's talked about in the past. I guess we're also supposed to believe he (and Hillary) support gun right because they decided to claim it this year and ignore his past calls for completely outlawing guns and confiscation - is that right. And John McCain is really a conservative now because he says so huh?
Yeah we've heard as recently as yesterday how Obama thinks it's his place to tell us voters what we can and can't consider about him when voting. Fortunately I' not obligated to follow his commands and can look at his whole record even if you choose not to.
Obama is a Marxist even if he's to cowardly to admit it for the duration of this campaign.
From an Obama speech given in 1993 to the AFL-CIO - video of which is available.
"I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer health care program. ... A single-payer health care plan, a universal health plan. And that's what I'd like to see. And as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, we have to take back the House."
Indeed Schultz - even in 1993 he was detailing the steps to get to socialized medicine, steps that include fooling dopes like you into believing he's not for it so he can first take the White House.
You might want to take some time and investigate his past positions instead of just sucking up what ever propaganda is campaign puts out for you to lap up.
Anon 1:36, did you manage to not drool all over your keyboard while typing that dribble? Single payer healthcare does not equal Marxism. However, suspending parts of the Constitution to suit the authoritarian desires of the present leadership does equal a slide towards fascism.
Also, what are your "Moderate to liberal" friends doing living sin Shadyside for if they have to stock up on guns because they are afraid of what will happen across Penn Avenue in November? How in the world does the election of a (half) black man lead to race riots? Why don't you quit dancing around it and just say that your life of prejudice has mad you afraid of a black man getting all uppity and becoming President?
Oh, and Joe Lieberman, Ed Koch and Geraldine Ferraro are going to go the way of the other Boomer era dinosaurs of the Democratic Party if Obama gets the election. They know their time has passed and they are gasping their last political breath.
I doubt this guy understands the political terms he throws around any more than Kevin James (or G. Bush Jr.) understood the meaning of "appeasement."
I am confident, however, that his understanding of the Second Amendment is at the level of Sen. Obama's -- when Sen. Obama was in second grade, 20 years before Sen. Obama became a Constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago and reasoned his way to a perception of an individualized right to firearms possession in the United States Constitution.
Some others, including many disparaging Sen. Obame on this point, might not recognize a genuine Constitutional argument if it landed at the tip of their nose and waved.
Oh for heaven's sake. As a former Marxist myself, and someone who has read a good deal of Marx and Engels and the scholarship regarding them and their ideas, I can assure you Obama is not a Marxist. Conservatives and Right wingers love to throw around that term to cover anyone who is Liberal or even VERY Liberal, but Liberalism and Marxism are not even on the same playing field. At all. In fact, our constitution, in terms of political philosophy is quite liberal and in general even the crunchiest liberals have more in common with an old school conservative ideologically than with a marxist. Sheesh. If you are going to toss accusations around, at least understand what you are saying.
"Oh goodness gracious how dumb are you man??"
Dumb enough to kick your fascist ass!
Now, I typically don't take anonymous commenters seriously but to your point about Obama supporting single payer in the past - yes, I was aware of that. However, there is pretty much no chance in hell of going from our current private market to a 100% government provided market. I think Obama realized that this is a big reason why HRC's plan in '93 failed and is why he is going towards a plan that keeps the private market in place and offers a subsidized national plan option.
Oh, and Anon - who do you support again? Bush-McCain? You might want to look at the electoral map and start preparing for an Obama presidency. Even with Obama losing big swing states like Ohio and Florida he will still win the general election over John McSame.
Maybe the reason people are buying guns and ammo is for self-defense -- Dick Cheney will have a lot of time on his hands soon, and he'll probably split his time between (1) hunting and (2) ducking the opprobrium of the countrymen he failed and shamed. The constant booing every time he dares go out in public will probably make Cheney more dangerous than usual with a gun in his hands.
Anyone who thinks the rise is oil and gas prices and Democratic control of Congress are coincidences, or the result of Bush Policies, think again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=G...feature=related
Oooops! Your commie slip is showing Democrats.
Commenting by HaloScan
