Literature, Religion, Politics, Rants, Murmurs, and Medieval History
Looks like it fits. Que bien.
liam,You asked on last thread I was on.... Jazzycat, you never answered my question. Given all the information we have about Obama, what possibly could lead you to suggest that he is something fundamentally different than how he presents himself? What possible grounds do you have to say he is a socialist or a communist? What is going on with this absurd 1950s-style red baiting?There are many grounds including the following in Obama's own words:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pckThis is not red baiting, this is red flags
Cowboy --It fits perfectly. Thanks again. My mother is ordering several for the family.
Jazzycat,The row about that interview doesn't really impress me and I can't really add anything to it that Greg Sargent already said.But really -- Obama has a tax plan, it's on his website. Stop insinuating things. If you really think Obama is lying about his intentions and planning some kind of radical distribution of wealth that goes far beyond normal progressive taxation, say so.
Correction: "I can't add anything to WHAT Greg Sargent said."Working too hard.
liam,The Obama statement unfiltered by what Greg Sargent thinks about it......“You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the Civil Rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be okay, but the Supreme Court never entered into the issues of re-distribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution – at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [it] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.“And that hasn’t shifted, and one of the, I think, the tragedies of the Civil Rights movement was because the Civil Rights movement became so court-focused, uh, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.”Frankly liam, I don't need anyone to interpret what Obama is talking about here. I sure don't need to hear democrats spin what he said and meant. No, while we may not agree, I have given you yet another grounds to be very worried about Obama's world-view and Marxist views.
Once again, you didn't answer my question.
liam,You asked what grounds did I have to say he is socialist or communist? I did answer it by giving you Obama's own words. However, let me state it this way....Answer: He (Obama) in his own words has advocated redistribution of wealth or as he told Joe the plumber spreading the wealth around. When you send 1040 tax filers who have paid no income tax a check and call it a tax cut, you are engaging in redistributing the wealth.A tax cut means cutting the amount of taxes someone pays. It is impossible for someone who pays no income taxes to get a tax cut. That is democrat speak!
If you're talking about Obama's tax credit, it's not really different from the earned income tax credit.As one commentator put it:"As a result, a number of analysts say, it is a stretch to say Obama's plan smacks of socialism. Instead, Obama's plan is much like the earned-income tax credit supported by presidents of both parties, and it somewhat resembles the negative income tax championed by conservative economist Milton Friedman as far back as 1962.'If this is socialism, then we've been socialistic for many decades,' said Jodie T. Allen, a senior editor at the Pew Research Center who worked on welfare policy under President Nixon. 'The notion that making transfers through the tax system is somehow a totally new form of American behavior is absurd. For better or worse, we use the tax code to subsidize all sorts of behavior.'"As socialist as Nixon. And calling Obama a communist is completely absurd.
Look, in the end I don't care how anyone defines Obama's tax policies. I do object to how McCain and Palin are implying he will enact some kind of radical anti-capitalist revolution. It's just fear-mongering. He's a moderate-liberal Democrat. If you don't like that, fine, but don't call him a communist.
The troll is back... And can't even appreciate a funny t-shirt.
Dude, Liam, how do you manage to pick up trolls? It's not like you go around sucker-punching people.
Post a Comment