Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Phanatik wrote:
Obama is a socialist. His policies are socialist. his friends are socialist, and he said we should judge him by those around him.

Probably, of course, "everyone is a socialist now." Its really a matter of to what degree.

Phanatik wrote:
He was a Muslim as a child. Islamic law says once a muslim, always a muslim.

No it doesn't. Islamic law says that if you give up your Muslim faith you are an apostate. Generally this means you are subject to the death penalty.

Phanatik wrote:
According to the laws of Kenya when Barry was born to a Kenyan father, Barry is a Kenyan.

Since when does the citizenship law of other countries have any bearing on US citizenship law?

dogma wrote:

Phanatik wrote:
Obama is a socialist. His policies are socialist. his friends are socialist, and he said we should judge him by those around him.

Probably, of course, "everyone is a socialist now." Its really a matter of to what degree.

Keynesians are socialists now? Someone tell Gordon Brown...

Joey wrote:

dogma wrote:

Phanatik wrote:
Obama is a socialist. His policies are socialist. his friends are socialist, and he said we should judge him by those around him.

Probably, of course, "everyone is a socialist now." Its really a matter of to what degree.

Keynesians are socialists now? Someone tell Gordon Brown...

Technically, by lose definitions of socialism they always have been. Anyone that pays taxes is a socialist though, so the point is kinda moot. The word doesn't mean a fething thing. It's just there for conservatives to paint people with.

Keynesians have been accused of being socialists by people in the US for years.

Nightwatch wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:Canada blows, man.

Just because the thread's about American politics doesn't mean we aren't listening...


*cough*cough* Oh, and politics and things and republicans and democrats and poor widows and injustice and freedom and women's rights and all that.

Speaking of Canada blows: Is a Canadian based team even gonna try to win the Stanley cup this season or are you guys content to simply burn down your own cities again?

Frazzled wrote:

shasolenzabi wrote:I still voted Nader last two prez elections.

I voted for Nader at least once. I think in the 1996 election.

I got to have dinner with Nader a few years ago, I don't agree with all his political ideas but that guy is pretty dang smart.

Frazzled wrote:Lots and Lots of Stuff about Republican Policies and cute lil' Wiener Dogs

You misconstrue my questions, good sir. He catechized, "If socialism works, why don't people support it?" This I catechized, "If republicanism works, why don't people support it?" And then I catechized a plethora more catechizes because your posts appear to seem thrice as acute if you avail a plethora of words and a Thesaurus. You may misconstrue this statement likewise, good sir, thus I humbly suggest you might access a dictionary for an improved comprehension.

LoneLictor wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Lots and Lots of Stuff about Republican Policies and cute lil' Wiener Dogs

You misconstrue my questions, good sir. He catechized, "If socialism works, why don't people support it?" This I catechized, "If republicanism works, why don't people support it?" And then I catechized a plethora more catechizes because your posts appear to seem thrice as acute if you avail a plethora of words and a Thesaurus. You may misconstrue this statement likewise, good sir, thus I humbly suggest you might access a dictionary for an improved comprehension.

Whats so awesome is that, that is not my quote.

Frazzled wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Lots and Lots of Stuff about Republican Policies and cute lil' Wiener Dogs

You misconstrue my questions, good sir. He catechized, "If socialism works, why don't people support it?" This I catechized, "If republicanism works, why don't people support it?" And then I catechized a plethora more catechizes because your posts appear to seem thrice as acute if you avail a plethora of words and a Thesaurus. You may misconstrue this statement likewise, good sir, thus I humbly suggest you might access a dictionary for an improved comprehension.

Whats so awesome is that, that is not my quote.

Well yeah, I kinda trimmed it down. But here it is in it's entirety.

Frazzled wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
If socialism doesn't work, why do I support it?
****See the statement above about lack of education?

Finland, which is often stated to have the best educational system in the world, is by US measures a socialist country. Implying that all those who believe in socialism lack education is not the proper way to parttake in a debate.

The USSR had an excellent school system. They also sent millions to the gulag.

Wait, first you claim that people who support socialism lack education, then you state that the USSR had an excellent school system, implying that your own statement isn't true. Make up your mind!

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
If socialism doesn't work, why do I support it?
****See the statement above about lack of education?

Finland, which is often stated to have the best educational system in the world, is by US measures a socialist country. Implying that all those who believe in socialism lack education is not the proper way to parttake in a debate.

The USSR had an excellent school system. They also sent millions to the gulag.

Wait, first you claim that people who support socialism lack education, then you state that the USSR had an excellent school system, implying that your own statement isn't true. Make up your mind!

USSR was communist. Go big or go home!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LoneLictor wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Lots and Lots of Stuff about Republican Policies and cute lil' Wiener Dogs

You misconstrue my questions, good sir. He catechized, "If socialism works, why don't people support it?" This I catechized, "If republicanism works, why don't people support it?" And then I catechized a plethora more catechizes because your posts appear to seem thrice as acute if you avail a plethora of words and a Thesaurus. You may misconstrue this statement likewise, good sir, thus I humbly suggest you might access a dictionary for an improved comprehension.

Whats so awesome is that, that is not my quote.

Well yeah, I kinda trimmed it down. But here it is in it's entirety.

Spoiler:

Frazzled wrote:

Melissia wrote:I dunno if I can say this enough, but Ron Paul is NOT a social liberal. He is very much a conservative.

No. He's a Libertarian. There's a major difference, but you have to look beyond the Democratic talking points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LoneLictor wrote:

Phanatik wrote:

LoneLictor wrote:Little known fact, Macedonia actually did pretty well as a socialist nation. During that time it didn't have economic issues or food shortages or a lack of democracy or anything. It's a real shame the people voted to change it. And yes, the change was peaceful. The politicians heeded to what the people wanted and stepped into the shadow without complaint.

But what did they have?
And, if it was so great, why did the people want to change it?

Xenos for life!

If Republicans are so great, why did the people elect Obama?
If Ronald Reagan was so great, why was he shot?
If the economy needs to be unregulated, why did people support the increase of taxes in the 20's?
If socialism doesn't work, why do I support it?

If Republicans are so great, why did the people elect Obama?
****Something about high gas prices and a recession. That usually happens after an eight year term and the VP is not running.

If Ronald Reagan was so great, why was he shot?
****Because the shooter thought he would impress an actress. You’re either a troll or blindingly ignorant. Reading, its not just for progs!

If the economy needs to be unregulated, why did people support the increase of taxes in the 20's?
****Pay for WWI.

If socialism doesn't work, why do I support it?
****See the statement above about lack of education?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShumaGorath wrote:Wow, this thread turned into the exact reason I don't post in these threads any more awful quick. Fraz dips his toe into the crazy conservative stalwart pond and suddenly a thirty foot gator bursts out and devours everyone.

Yet you're posting...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slarg232 wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Wow, this thread turned into the exact reason I don't post in these threads any more awful quick. Fraz dips his toe into the crazy conservative stalwart pond and suddenly a thirty foot gator bursts out and devours everyone.

I'm still uneated.

Give hope a chance. Weiner dogs only have 6 inch legs. It takes awhile to get there.

Frazzled, taking short dogs on long walks since 2010.

In that case, your attempt to use five dollar words only makes you incoherent.

I'll use little words.

He say, "If socialism works, why didn't they support it?"
I say, "If republicanism works, why didn't people support it?"
Then I use lots more questions and big words to try sound smart.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Joey wrote:

dogma wrote:

Phanatik wrote:
Obama is a socialist. His policies are socialist. his friends are socialist, and he said we should judge him by those around him.

Probably, of course, "everyone is a socialist now." Its really a matter of to what degree.

Keynesians are socialists now? Someone tell Gordon Brown...

Technically, by lose definitions of socialism they always have been. Anyone that pays taxes is a socialist though, so the point is kinda moot. The word doesn't mean a fething thing. It's just there for conservatives to paint people with.

Socialism is the economic belief that society is best served by state control of industry, to variable degrees.
Only in the US is it a prejorative. And what does "anyone that pays taxes is a socialist" mean?

Hell, there were taxes in feudal Europe. Was feudal Europe socialist?

Albatross wrote:Hell, there were taxes in feudal Europe. Was feudal Europe socialist?

Reforming the Middle Eatern Healthcare System. One Crusade at a time.

Joey wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Joey wrote:

dogma wrote:

Phanatik wrote:
Obama is a socialist. His policies are socialist. his friends are socialist, and he said we should judge him by those around him.

Probably, of course, "everyone is a socialist now." Its really a matter of to what degree.

Keynesians are socialists now? Someone tell Gordon Brown...

Technically, by lose definitions of socialism they always have been. Anyone that pays taxes is a socialist though, so the point is kinda moot. The word doesn't mean a fething thing. It's just there for conservatives to paint people with.

Socialism is the economic belief that society is best served by state control of industry, to variable degrees.
Only in the US is it a prejorative. And what does "anyone that pays taxes is a socialist" mean?

No. Not really. It never has meant pure state control (that was co opted into communism which itself actually doesn't mean anything either) and the word has never really had a unified meaning at all. From the beginnings it's meant little more than "Noun with collectivist traits of some sort"; take your pick of whatever you want the noun to be. It could be anything and everything. By it's most basic definition incorporated business is socialist. Militaries are socialist. States themselves as they are considered in modern days are socialist enterprises. The word is worthless in modern times.

I mean Christ, Anarchism is considered a socialist philosophy. The purely anti governmental and anti control ideal of anarchism is somehow considered through the lens of a collectivist resource management concept. That's idiotic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

And the Republicans do better?

Yea, Obama is the best you guys got at the moment. Hate to break it to you but the other side is just full of misfits and tards.

They had an article on The Daily Show Thursday in which they interviewed two different American Socialist activist groups (Democratic Socialists of America and Socialist Organizer Party) and both said that the other was not socialist at all, while both also said that Obama was absolutely not a socialist, though for different reasons. They also talked to a conservative political commentator that said that not only was Obama a socialist, but that he was also a fascist.

Joey wrote:The Economist says that the devil hates socialism? Now that is interesting.

Possibly because socialism works. So therefore the devil make sure it doesnt. With socialism comes increased corruption and greed.
I think you have missed out on understanding the real bugbears of socialism Joey, a socialist in real terms is someone who says 'others must pay'. Real life socialism seldom prohibits wealth accumulation for the socialist elite, it simply tries to replace or superimpose one elite on another one. The plight of the people rarely has any value other than as a meal ticket to get socialists in power.

Now real selfless socialism would be something worth the struggle. Won't happen though.



This is not a theological comment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Poppabear wrote:And the Republicans do better?

Yea, Obama is the best you guys got at the moment. Hate to break it to you but the other side is just full of misfits and tards.

I so fear thats true.

Obama in a second term, with no further election to concern himself with will be dangerous.

Not to the other potential invasion targets in the world however. Which, to be honest, is the concern for most non-Americans.

Orlanth wrote:Obama in a second term, with no further election to concern himself with will be dangerous.

I would say it's awesome rather than dangerous. Then again, he's done a lot of things which I approve of (insert people accusing me of being a leftie commie socialist here, regardless of my arguments for a regulated free market and arguments against government ownership of anything, but these people don't give a damn about facts or truth or honesty and such) soooo....

Melissia wrote:

Orlanth wrote:Obama in a second term, with no further election to concern himself with will be dangerous.

I would say it's awesome rather than dangerous. Then again, he's done a lot of things which I approve of (insert people accusing me of being a leftie commie socialist here, regardless of my arguments for a regulated free market and arguments against government ownership of anything, but these people don't give a damn about facts or truth or honesty and such) soooo....

Don't really have much to contribute, but I appreciate that link quite a bit. Thanks.

Poppabear wrote:And the Republicans do better?

Yea, Obama is the best you guys got at the moment. Hate to break it to you but the other side is just full of misfits and tards.

NO.

Frazzled wrote:Bland vs. the Bland in 2012 HURR!

The only alternative the GOP ran other than bland was various kinds of crazy, so really we should all be thankful none of the truly, deeply insane are going to win the GOP presidency. We should all be very worried that so many truly, deeply crazy candidates got so far, of course.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:The USSR had an excellent school system. They also sent millions to the gulag.

A powerful, incredible point, if one is willing to completely and utterly ignore the basic differences between a democratic society that chose a broadly socialist model, like Finland, as opposed to a totalitarian state with a socialist model, like the USSR.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:I didn't say it was bad.

In an enlightened Frazzled administration:
*Secondary education would be funded similar to the UK or German system (whichever is better)
*Intensive marketing efforts to promote education and not that PSA nonsense. Inversely marketing/songs etc. that support a lack of education would get hammered.
*Don't graduate high school? No driver's license, no government support.

This sounds pretty solid, though I'd think that a decent qualification in some kind of trade school should be an option instead of highschool graduation. I mean, we all know some people, and that while they might be great people, the only way they're graduating highschool is by making highschool so easy that it means nothing to graduate from it. It doesn't mean they're useful, it just means they'd be better of spending that time learning a trade.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orlanth wrote:With socialism comes increased corruption and greed.

You probably need to take a closer look at the capitalist economies of South America before you make that kind of a statement. Corruption is a product of culture, and of accountability.

I think you have missed out on understanding the real bugbears of socialism Joey, a socialist in real terms is someone who says 'others must pay'.

No, it isn't. That's just easy, name calling politics.

Obama in a second term, with no further election to concern himself with will be dangerous.

People said that about Clinton too. It was nonsense then, and it's nonsense now.

Sebster I don't know why you bother day in and day out with the same tired repetition. They say the same things every time a thread like this comes up. It's never real, it's never true, it's always intellectually lazy. But the fact that despite you entering these threads and repeatedly setting the record straight they continue doing it should be indicative of something. Their unwillingness to ever bend to reality likely being the most important thing. Why keep trying?

"Whose more the fool? The fool, or the fool who argues with him?"

ShumaGorath wrote:Sebster I don't know why you bother day in and day out with the same tired repetition. They say the same things every time a thread like this comes up. It's never real, it's never true, it's always intellectually lazy. But the fact that despite you entering these threads and repeatedly setting the record straight they continue doing it should be indicative of something. Their unwillingness to ever bend to reality likely being the most important thing. Why keep trying?

It's kinda fun. Especially when you get something like biccat claiming Adam Smith believed the relationship between the employer and the employee is always equal.

I like Sebster's approach. It's good to see someone sticking up for reality without flying off the handle all the time. He's got more patience than I do.

Orlanth wrote:
Obama in a second term, with no further election to concern himself with will be dangerous.

Because, clearly, all rational projections show the Democrats retaking the House, and a filibuster proof majority in the Senate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

sebster wrote:
This sounds pretty solid, though I'd think that a decent qualification in some kind of trade school should be an option instead of highschool graduation. I mean, we all know some people, and that while they might be great people, the only way they're graduating highschool is by making highschool so easy that it means nothing to graduate from it. It doesn't mean they're useful, it just means they'd be better of spending that time learning a trade.

Yes, a thousand times yes.

Further, the college prep element of high school needs to be dialed back significantly. Some schools in the US do a better job than others, but in general things like exchange programs with community colleges are fairly rare.

The US education system is highly flexible, but that flexibility makes it an absolute mess.

Hell, it was easier for my to apply to U Sydney (thanks Australearn) than to U Chicago.

ShumaGorath wrote:Sebster I don't know why you bother day in and day out with the same tired repetition. They say the same things every time a thread like this comes up. It's never real, it's never true, it's always intellectually lazy. But the fact that despite you entering these threads and repeatedly setting the record straight they continue doing it should be indicative of something. Their unwillingness to ever bend to reality likely being the most important thing. Why keep trying?

Why keep posting then Shuma? Clearly the great wide world is craving your keen understanding a knowledge of the Great Triuth. go forth young man and spread your wisdom to the unwashed masses!