Will MSM Report on Obama Membership in Socialist New Party?

reply to post by mental modulator


sorry you left out the new "massia; sp? I think we all are going to need a lot of help from the devine in order to survive;because I don't see much help from "We The People"

Wait! Is "All hail the iron fist of communism" off topic?

Seriously, even if you were to believe that Obama was a socialist, and wanted to instate himself as a Stalinist leader of America, (which is completely ludicrous even by conspiracy standards) there is absolutely no way that this would ever get past congress, the senate and the American people.

Of course he could have more subversive and insidious ways of implementing this over the long term, by weakening the willpower of the American people with sinister ploys such as health care and hope. (God forbid)

reply to post by MrVertigo


I tend to agree w/you; however, look how much Bush as gotten past congress in stealing our civil liberties.

What many are failing to realize here is that the appearance of what we called communism and socialism of old, when it was very easy to distinguish our republic from either is now much harder, there are more gray areas than ever between what is happening and transitioning here, and to be perfectly honest if you do not see this as a fact then you are living in a vacuum.

I happened to watch the one McCain rally yesterday where some gentleman slammed Obama as a socialist and went into a nonsensical rant about it sort of sounding like someone in the 1950's or 60's, well I hate to rain on his parade, we have been quietly marching in that direction the last 7 or 8 years, do some digging on the changes in executive power and some executive orders quietly passed, and unfortunately some even consider many of the decisions of the current administration as socialist, one sign that many point to is the out of control deficit spending that is taking place unchecked that have led to the possibility of the banking system becoming government controlled and if social security fails as it looks like it will, this will undoubtedly lead to some government based program to take it's place as well as some sort of federalized healthcare since that industry has for some reason collapsed.

Actually if you look at it, it is somewhat of a reversal, whereby wealth is not being taken from the rich and evenly distributed, far from it, it has been taken from the middle class and poor and redistributed to the rich, what you call that I am not sure.

I really feel that people that are using the word socialist and communist are not in touch with the water that they have been gradually surrounded by, we have been incrementally pushed down that road... I do not buy the old labels and the quickness to villafy Obama, it's just not a reality because we have been gradually moving towards this direction before there was an Obama for president.

[edit on 10-10-2008 by phinubian]

Originally posted by MrVertigo
there is absolutely no way that this would ever get past congress, the senate and the American people.
(God forbid)

You mean like they got posse comitatus(sp) and the patriot act 1 and 2 passed?
I mean, who has time to read much, these days?

Originally posted by phinubian
we have been gradually moving towards this direction before there was an Obama for president.

[edit on 10-10-2008 by phinubian]

It's almost like it's been planned.
Like our current financial woes!

Capitalism = The creation of resources which are distributed to productive members of society.

Socialism = The confiscation of resources which are distributed to unproductive members of society.

Sums it up exactly. Capitalism seeks to even the field of opportunity so everyone has a chance at the same, while Socialism frowns on that and seeks to even the score, saying no one should be left out, even if they don't contribute.

Socialism is fundamentally flawed.

reply to post by sos37


capitalism -
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

socialism
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.


SO far the capital has gone right where it always goes...

Can you gives some examples in which Obama wants to destroy the concept
of CORPRATISM?

HAS Obama stated that each person is entitled to a plot of land for free?

Has he suggested that the entire net wealth of the nation is redistributed equally?

HAS Obama suggested a central method and standard for all production?

Has Obama cited the flag and incited anger and hatred for the concept of MONEY?


If you cannot answer a DEFINITIVE yes to these questions, then your argument is about as speculative as they come. The idea you are trying to imply is a very
SPECIFIC concept, it has a recipe and a structure.
You are assuming
with the highest degree of speculation.

reply to post by sos37


Well... that's from a jaded perspective. It's easy to agree with you when you put it like that, but others see it like this:

1) Capitalism - A complete free market full of chaos, that allows the rich to hoard masses of wealth while the masses (and the backbone of the infrastructure) are underpaid and overworked.

2) Socialism (when done right) - A system that pays proportionally to the work done. No one person can own such an exorbitant amount of cash that Jesus himself couldn't spend. The working class are paid a fair amount, enough to thrive and live happy.

The truth is, there are major problems with both system. In fact, I'd say one of the big downfalls they share is greed.

*Edit to add:

And I disagree whole heartedly that the idea of socialism revolves around redistributing wealth evenly to everyone. There would still be an upper and lower class, just the range would be far less drastic.

[edit on 10-10-2008 by Sublime620]

Its almost as if righties are stuck in the past. Whenever they feel the need to throw mud to the libs they make references to "Carter" or "the Soviet Union". I mean this is so outdated... really does a conservative really find it that hard to argue in the present? Do they feel the need to look back at Reagan and babble on?

McCain is a hypocrite to his own core arguement of experience,
McCain doesnt know how many houses he has,
McCain says the economy is all fine (so long as he still keeps his millions and his $100 million wife)
McCain and the right still cant justify the reasons for going to war with Iraq, only that the "surge" is working). funny how we dont hear "WMD" any longer.
Palin turned her back on the Union,
Palin doesnt know the the VP does,
Palin has no executive experience, the executive experience righties site in favour of Palin and against Obama would make McCain inexperienced aswell
Palin managed to give what is probably one of the wealthiest states in natural resources $500 in earmarks per person, the most out of any other state.
Palin abused her power and trust as governor within a mere year of her governorship,
Palin can name a single major law case other than "Roe vs Wade"
McCain has deep connections within the keating five,
and lastly but not least
McCain sat on the board of the ultra rightwing group called the US Council for World Freedom.

I could go on and on.

Get your facts straight. Get off the hypocrisy express.

New link. Obama in photo with other members of Socialist New Party for anyone wanting more info on this. Link to full article here:


gatewaypundit.blogspot.com...

[edit on 12-10-2008 by David9176]


[edit on 12-10-2008 by David9176]

[edit on 12-10-2008 by David9176]

the wealthy could care less about what political stance you take, as long as you don't interfere with their profits...only then is when war, people getting murdered or assasinated are called in to "restore" the flow of profits. there are always people ready to kill other people for the right price, always has been, always will be. go ahead, wave your flags, give your speeches, change leadership if you have to...just don't interfere with profits. let me ask you a question...why isn't your anger directed at the wealthy, since they have been the ones that have been serviced?

The "affordable housing" CONTRIBUTED to Wall Streets problem.
(Um and if I remember correctly it was the Bush Administration who pushed "The American Dream" down everyone's throat)(I love how conservatives have such short term memorys)

The trickle down theory continues to destroy the poor, lower and upper middle class.
I only care about my friends, family and neighbors.
I don't care about Wall Street, it should have been allowed to crash and self correct but nope we are now knee deep into the Socialistic Country that so many of you are against and afraid Obama will lead us into.
BUT the election has not happened yet, Obama has not won and he has not put our country in motion for socialism did he? Who did that? Oh yeah The Bush Administration, I forgot.

Will the MSM report on Palin's close dealings with anti-American hate groups and her attempts to gain them political power? Anyone that things that the MSM is not reporting on Barak and his bad ties has no radio and has not turned on cable news in about a year.

[edit on 10/13/08 by MorningStar8741]

reply to post by MorningStar8741


Your post would make a good thread. This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. Deflection and diversion is a quite a useful tactic. Obviously it doesn't take just a politician to do so.

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by MorningStar8741

 

Your post would make a good thread. This has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. Deflection and diversion is a quite a useful tactic. Obviously it doesn't take just a politician to do so.

You are absoloutely right. I learned it from neocons. See everytime I ask that in a legitmate thread that fits, I get a response tying Obama to someone. So, I thought I would try it out. I know neo-cons hate nothing more than their own tactics used against them, it always makes them run and tell and cry and complain so I thought I would try it. Only took one post to work.

reply to post by MorningStar8741


Alot of people do this on these boards. Not just "neo-cons". I actually had to look this up because i've never even heard of the term.

Once again...you are yet another person who uses personal insults to try to get your point across.

I won't go that route anymore. And it's true that it has nothing to do with this thread. Make a new one. So many of these threads end up on completely different topics, i like to keep them from becoming flame fests.

And also, don't assume anyone that doesn't share your opinion on these things doesn't deserve some respect. I'd like to think you are better than that.

[edit on 14-10-2008 by David9176]

reply to post by David9176


You really had to "luck" this guy up? Really? Where have you been? Turn on a radio or television, you would be amazed at what you do not need ATS for. As far as throwing personal insults, that is a nice accusation but, unfounded. Either show me these personal insults or retract that statement. I never insulted anyone personally and you know it. I will now though. I am saying that to claim this was all news to you is a little far fetched.

reply to post by MorningStar8741


First of all, i said i had to look up the the DEFINITION of the word NEO-CON, which you were implying that i was. Like i stated i've never heard of the term and i don't appreciate it.

So, I thought I would try it out. I know neo-cons hate nothing more than their own tactics used against them, it always makes them run and tell and cry and complain so I thought I would try it. Only took one post to work.

reply to post by David9176


Nice job editing "luck this guy up" to "look this term up" That is smooth. Now people will think that I simplymisunderstood and cannot quote properly. GOOD JOB! I know what it originally said though don't I? I know you do.

Anyway, I never called you that, you are reading things into this that you want to. I guess you want a fight or something. Look elsewhere. I did not personally insult you. I did not call you a neo-con. You are now just dragging this out for no reason, which is ironic considering it started because you were so worried about the integrity of this thread. Please, either back up one of the things that you are accusing me of or let it go man. You are fighting with the wrong guy.