Yes, you are advocating socialism, just yesterday you advocated a nationalization of our banking system. --- spot on
On Mar 5, 12:01 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, you are advocating socialism, just yesterday you advocated a > nationalization of our banking system. > > I fully understand the political, economic and social concepts of socialism, > I encourage you to try and grasp those concepts Fritzie! Here, by > definition, is the concept of socialisim: > > "Date: 1837. From Latin socialis for "friend" or "companion" or > "associate". Any of various economic and political theories advocating > collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of > production and distribution of goods; usually there is no private property; > in Marxist theory this is also considered just a transitional stage between > capitalism and communism and it is distinguished by unequal distribution of > goods and pay according to work done." > > The above definition is by Mr. John Spargo, from his work titled: > "Socialism, A Summary And Interpretation Of Socialist Principles" (McMillan > & Co. 1913). Below is the Wiki definition, which is quite similar. > > "Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or > governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and > distribution of goods. A stage of society in Marxist theory transitional > between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution > of goods and pay according to work done" > > The truth is, that the Democratic Party now openly advocates socialism, > which by its very definition, is some middle ground and transition to > communism. Although the Democrats used to try and evade the moniker, and > distance themselves from being classified as socialists, they do so no more. > Congresswoman Maxine Waters, (D. Cal.) this past summer, parroted the > Venezuelan socialist dictator, Hugo Chavez, calling for the nationalization > of the oil companies: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUaY3LhJ-IQ > > As I just quoted, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) said just > recently: > > "So if there's any seriousness about what some of our Republican colleagues > are saying here in the House and elsewhere about improving the number of > refineries, then maybe they'd be willing to have these refineries owned > publicly, owned by the people of the United States, so that the people of > the United States can determine how much of the product is refined and put > out on the market. To me, that sounds like a very good idea." > > http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/why_do_we_call_them_democrats.... > > Congressman Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) on June 18, 2008 in a Press Conference > of the Democratic Leadership said: > > "Should the people of the United States own refineries? Maybe so. Frankly, > I think that's a good idea. Then we could control the amount of refined > product much more capably that gets out on the market... > > http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/why_do_we_call_them_democrats.... > > Democrats openly call for redistribution of wealth in our Nation, they call > for socialized medicine, socialized energy, and in general, the Democratic > Party openly advocates the federal government's involvement in each and > every facet of our lives. Period. What part of this can any member of > this group, with a straight face, argue is NOT socialism? > > By example, here in President Obama's own words, he openly advocates a > redistribution of wealth: > > http://www.breitbart.tv/html/195153.html > > Of course, Vice President Biden believes that a socialist, "redistribution > of wealth" plan, is the "patriotic thing to do": > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCqgNWRjmAc > > There is no question that President Obama is calling for the very tenets of > socialism, which is the forerunner of communism, and a economic and > political system that has failed miserably throughout recorded > history. President > Obama's, and many Democrats' belief, is that "Socialism, Communism, > Marxism, Trotskyism, and Stalinism were all wonderful political, social and > economic systems, we just haven't had the right folks try and implement them > yet!" > > ==================== > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Fritz da Cat > <fritz.da.cat...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > We're not socialists, not that you understand what a socialist really > > is. The GOP is dying. > > > On Mar 5, 9:44 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > As I said yesterday, it is my belief that this little (stupid) strategy > > is > > > going to backfire on the socialists. Americans are hurting, and the > > likes > > > of Rahm Emanuel, Paul Begalia, James Carville and other Obama sock > > puppets > > > are attacking Limbaugh?? > > > > LOL!! If the economy were not so grave, this would be hysterical! > > > > Note how the socialists and the uninformed immediately jumped on the > > > bandwagon however.....How many posts, just to this group yesterday, did > > we > > > see posted, that proclaimed that Rush was the "Boogeyman"?? > > > =========== > > > > Rahm Emanuel: Admitted and Professed Socialist: > > > > "So if there's any seriousness about what some of our Republican > > colleagues > > > are saying here in the House and elsewhere about improving the number of > > > refineries, then maybe they'd be willing to have these refineries owned > > > publicly, owned by the people of the United States, so that the people of > > > the United States can determine how much of the product is refined and > > put > > > out on the market. To me, that sounds like a very good idea." > > > > *Former Congressman and now Obama Administration Chief of Staff Rahm > > > Emanuel, (Socialist, Il.) June 18, 2008 in a Press Conference of the > > > Democratic Leadership. * > > > >http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/why_do_we_call_them_democrats... > > .<http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/06/why_do_we_call_them_democrats... > > .> > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Fritz da Cat <fritz.da.cat...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > GOP to Michael Steele: Quiet About Rush Limbaugh or You're Fired > > > > >http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whispers/2009/3/3/gop-to-micha. > > .. > > > > > (excerpt) > > > > > Apology to Rush Limbaugh aside, new Republican National Committee > > > > Chairman Michael Steele is coming under fire from his own GOP troops > > > > to shut up and focus on his job of organizing the party and raising > > > > money, not fighting with his own political kind. Several Republican > > > > advisers to Congress and the previous Bush administration told > > > > Whispers that they are worried that the war of words is fracturing the > > > > party when it should be healing the division between conservatives and > > > > moderates in the wake of the 2008 election. > > > > > "What is amazing is that Steele was elected because of his > > > > communications skills, and it is those skills that are damaging the > > > > Republican Party. Before people begin to completely judge him as > > > > worthless, Steele needs to focus and knuckle down on building a strong > > > > foundation at RNC so we can begin rebuilding our majority," says a top > > > > GOP strategist who has worked for House and Senate Republican leaders. > > > > "If his implosion continues, RNC members are likely to call a special > > > > session to dump him for an effective chairman. There is not much > > > > patience for failure." > > > > > Others want Steele to re-evaluate his role in the party. Of concern: > > > > For no reason, he is dividing the GOP between conservatives who like > > > > Limbaugh and moderates who don't and jeopardizing future fundraising > > > > efforts, his key responsibility. "The general sentiment of the > > > > conference is that Steele needs to step back and get a handle on his > > > > role in the party," says an influential congressional aide. Namely, > > > > advisers want him to stay out of the media and focus instead on hiring > > > > his staff and revamping the RNC. "He needs to hire staff for the RNC, > > > > get the operations up and running, start raising money, and understand > > > > that his role is to win elections," says a senior party adviser. > > > > Officials are concerned that Steele either doesn't understand his > > > > responsibilities or has an inflated vision of his role. "At this > > > > point, it is as if he has a fundamental misunderstanding of the job > > > > description. An RNC chairman who attacks Republicans and insults > > > > conservative icons is about as counterproductive as any Democrat could > > > > hope for," says the adviser. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Buh Bye GOP.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
