Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Do we really want to elect a Communist?

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Barack Obama was born of Communist activists, mentored by a communist writer and activist, spent his college days hanging around radical activists, worked as a radical community organizer learning the radical tactics of Alinsky, kept contact with radicals through the years, attends a radical church, and today lends his political skill to the international goals of radical activists, and has radicals working on for his campaign.

Obama and his commuinist background

Obama is more than a left-wing liberal. Please take a few moments to peruse the above link. It is a frightening chronicle of his communist activities over the years. His trip to Europe, and his proposals there, leave no doubt that if elected, he would become the first communist president, at least in spirit and philosophy, if not in membership.




posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 06:53 PM
link   
I think you may be confusing communist with socialism. As far as I can see most of what he is proposing, the rest of the western world have already. You have to realise that the US style of living is not the norm, it is the exception. For some reason that i can never fathom, the US has this aversion to socialist principles.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Wotan
 


Several of his mentors were card carrying members of the communist party of the US.
As for socialism, yes, most Americans despise it. This country was founded on the principles of working hard to get ahead, not working hard so that someone who doesn't work hard, can benefit from your work. It does not mean that we don't believe in helping those, who through no fault of their own, are in dire straights. However, in the US, there are millions on welfare, because they are simply too lazy to work.
In addition, Obama's ideas are at best naive, at worst dangerous. Disarming a nation, in hopes that regimes like Iran and North Korea will follow, is extremely foolish. Yet, that is exactly what Obama wants. England, of all countries should understand that. Just look at Chamberlain and what his "peace in our time" lead to. Fortunately, a great man, Churchill stepped onto the stage to save the day.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Now you will probably hate me for saying this but ..........

THe US seems to live in the past, especially the ''this is what we were founded on''. Move on, it was a long time ago, things evolve. Until you can get rid of that baggage the US will be stuck up its own arse.

WW2 was a bloody long time ago - We in the UK have moved on. Its totally irrelevant nowadays. Jeez, we dont go on about the battle of waterloo, trafalgar etc etc.

When has North Korea or Iran ever been a threat to the US?

For a nation that has the amount of wealth the US has, it is very selfish with it. Dont you care about your own citizens? It doesnt look like it from this side of the pond.

To me, the US is a third World Country with money.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wotan
For a nation that has the amount of wealth the US has, it is very selfish with it. Dont you care about your own citizens? It doesnt look like it from this side of the pond.


I work hard for what I have. I have a bit of a problem seeing my paycheck disappear into taxes that just become "entitlements" for the Welfare class.

It's socialism, or as Obama and the Dems likes to call it, "redistribution of wealth"



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Wotan
 





When has North Korea or Iran ever been a threat to the US?

Well, let's see, there was the Korean War. You know, that "police action" by the UN which took over 36,000 US lives, over 8,000 MIA's and over 90,000 wounded Americans.
Then there was the Iran hostage crisis, when Iran held over 50 of our citizens for over 400 days.
Of course, there are the Iranian arms and bombs that are being smuggled into Iraq to kill American (and British) soldiers.
If the modern English all hold the same ideas as you seem to, I don't think that you'd be able to withstand an invasion from some belligerent country. Your ideas do disservice to those British solders that fought so valiantly to give you the freedom of speech that you still enjoy. Had they not succeeded, you might not even exist. An England under Nazi rule would have had no use for Socialism, Communism, or free speech. By the way, if Socialism or Communism is so great, why did Russia and most of Eastern Europe throw it away? It seems like they're the smart ones.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Amen. I feel the same way. People that work hard for their money shouldn't have to give it to some slackers that don't work, because they know people like Obama will give them whatever they need, to get their vote.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 08:56 PM
link   
I think you misunderstand what I am saying.

I do not let what happened in WW2 go lightly, all i am saying is that we do not dwell on what has happened in the distant past. Its over, let it go. We cannot change the past.

North Korea was no threat to the US whatsoever and you know it. Yes, Iran did have a few US citizens hostage but it is still no excuse to go to war over it.

If the US and UK didnt go into Iraq in the first place, they wouldnt be getting killed by Iranian supplied weapons now. It was about oil and nothing else.

There is NO country threatening the UK or the US with an invasion as far as I know.

Ah, the WW2 thing - US came to save us - forget it, i am not even going down that route or you and I will argue forever over that one. I am sick of hearing how you yanks saved the world.

For your information most of Europes countries are socialist to some form or another - its the US that is the odd one out.

Some of you yanks ought to get out more and leave your country and visit others instead of learning about the world from the internet.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Obama is NOT a socialist...


Socialism, in it's traditional and true definition, means "the workers democratic ownership and/or control of the means of production". Such a definition implies that rather than a government bureaucracy for managing such means, there is a focus on highly democratic organisation, education and awareness, and every individual is encouraged to become an active, rather than passive participant in that which effect their lives.

Source

Socialism was and is a movement for the people by the people.

You have believed the lies from those who live by exploiting your labor for their own gains, and I bet none of you have ever questioned what you've been told. Your culture is so full of lies and you just believe it no question, no checking of the facts.

Those in power in the West are paranoid about socialism, they are the ones who will lose, the people (you and me) will only gain from socialism. So it is in their interest to spread lies and myths about what socialism is.

C'mon ATS members, you are supposed to be good researchers yet you all fall for the biggest lies from your right wing fascist government. You all claim to not trust government yet you fall for their lies.

The ruling elites don't care about socialism, or fascism, or left or right, those labels are there to control and divide you. The powers that be will use whatever method of control they can.

Socialism doesn't have to be right or left, it can be libertarian...


It is recognized that there are authoritarian systems and behavior, distinct from libertarian, or non-authoritarian ones. Since capitalism's early beginnings in Europe, and it's authoritarian trend of wage-slavery for the majority of people (working class) by a smaller, elite group (a ruling, or, capitalist class) who own the "means of production": machines, land, factories, there was a liberatory movement in response to capitalism known as "Socialism". In almost every case, the socialist movement has been divided along authoritarian, and libertarian lines. The anarchists on the libertarian side, and the Jacobins, Marxists, Leninists, Stalinists, and reformist state-socialists on the authoritarian side. (And liberals more or less split down the middle.)

Source

Libertarian, a system based on non-authoritarian principles.
Socialism, workers ownership of thier means of production.

The private ownership of production is what keeps us exploited and poor. If the workers equally owned the company you work for, we would all be better off (collectives, COOPS). The wealth created by you wouldn't go to someone else, it would be yours. The harder you work the more you would make, a direct effect, instead of hoping your 'boss' gives you a raise once in awhile.

So does Obama fit this picture? I don't think so. It will be capitalism and exploitation of labour as per usual.

Social services is not socialism.
Social engineering is not socialism.
Hitler was not a socialist (yes some people do think this).
Russia, not socialist (or communist either).
China, not socialist (or communist either).



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
WW2 irrelevant? move on? wow, I think you need to open a history book. Those who "move on" are doomed to repeat the darkest parts of world history.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus

Barack Obama was born of Communist activists, mentored by a communist writer and activist, spent his college days hanging around radical activists, worked as a radical community organizer learning the radical tactics of Alinsky, kept contact with radicals through the years, attends a radical church, and today lends his political skill to the international goals of radical activists, and has radicals working on for his campaign.

Obama and his commuinist background

Obama is more than a left-wing liberal. Please take a few moments to peruse the above link. It is a frightening chronicle of his communist activities over the years. His trip to Europe, and his proposals there, leave no doubt that if elected, he would become the first communist president, at least in spirit and philosophy, if not in membership.


Mcain is a communist Obama is a communist Clinto is a communist

Do Americans really want to vote for Communists?

I guess the Asnwer is going to be yes they do



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by hannamtong
WW2 irrelevant? move on? wow, I think you need to open a history book. Those who "move on" are doomed to repeat the darkest parts of world history.


WW2 or any other war has no relavence to the original post and I never mentioned it first either. Its is always the yanks that mention the war.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
As for socialism, yes, most Americans despise it. This country was founded on the principles of working hard to get ahead, not working hard so that someone who doesn't work hard, can benefit from your work.


See that is not what socialism is about at all.

You live in a system now where people can get very wealthy by exploiting other peoples labour and not lifting a finger themselves.

It's a myth that the wealthy worked hard to get wealthy.

Under socialism you would be rewarded directly for your labour because you would own the means of production and benefit directly from profits made. If you can work but refuse to then you get nothing.

There is an incredible amount of wealth and resources, but a very small percentage of people have control over it and thus they have the power to exploit for their own gains while the rest of the world struggles for survival. It's easy for them to maintain the myth because the wealthy own the media.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by solo1
 


most americans i talk to arnt even really intrested in voting. i think everyone is finally realizing this election we get to choose from two diffrent used car salesmen.

...no thanks.

ill stay at home on voting day.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wotan
I think you misunderstand what I am saying.

I do not let what happened in WW2 go lightly, all i am saying is that we do not dwell on what has happened in the distant past. Its over, let it go. We cannot change the past.

North Korea was no threat to the US whatsoever and you know it. Yes, Iran did have a few US citizens hostage but it is still no excuse to go to war over it.

If the US and UK didnt go into Iraq in the first place, they wouldnt be getting killed by Iranian supplied weapons now. It was about oil and nothing else.

There is NO country threatening the UK or the US with an invasion as far as I know.

Ah, the WW2 thing - US came to save us - forget it, i am not even going down that route or you and I will argue forever over that one. I am sick of hearing how you yanks saved the world.

For your information most of Europes countries are socialist to some form or another - its the US that is the odd one out.

Some of you yanks ought to get out more and leave your country and visit others instead of learning about the world from the internet.


Bravo Bravo ***** Read it 5 stars

Bump it all the way



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Do we really want to elect another Fascist?



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:33 PM
link   
I guess a website called 'The Obamafile' is the absolute authority, truthful, and reliable resource on the matter.

It even has a few low resolution graphics of Karl Marx on it to demonstrate its credibility


I gotta say guys, looking in from the outside of the 'states, America looks like a harsh autocracy rather than representing any forms of liberal democracy.

I'm sure it's a great place and all, but I'd truly dread living in it.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:43 PM
link   
People called Roosevelt a communist too, and some probably still do. People often call liberals socialists or communists, that doesn't make them so.

I know and associate with many Episcopalians. I understand the Episcopalian liturgy and the tenets of the faith. However, I am not an Episcopalian.

Obama has known and associated with many liberals and a few radicals. He understands socialism and communism. However, he is not a communist.

If those who call him socialist or communist actually read Karl Marx, including "The Communist Manifesto," they would see the difference.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


It's actually the capitalist system which creates the need for welfare. In a true socialist economy there is no need for welfare. Take a look at the current housing crisis, it's capitalism that allowed this to happen, and now many people (and some companies) require the help of welfare.



posted on Jul, 27 2008 @ 10:03 PM
link   
I will take the lesser of the evils- and if it means calling him a commie, thats fine.

We will be able to do so freely, however, and families will reunite with their loved ones, sooner rather than later.

We will be able to assemble on the streets and protest (i hope) without arrest, and be able to speak freely, like calling Obama a Communist!!!

Wont that be fun! Bring back the good old times and do away with the Bush crime family, and the Cheneys and the worlds war mongers, arrest them all for crimes against humanity, and free up the phone lines, so we can speak, as is our right to do, and get rid of the idiot $6 an hour Homeland Security- nice title
clean the airports, destroy the Patriot Bill, (toilet paper),
No one wants to kill us but THIS CURRENT GOVERNMENT-

Do we want a communist in office????

Hell, you know darn well he is not communist, but if that is what you call it, then YES!!!!!!!!!!!







new topics




 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join