RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Sanity -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 7:16:26 PM)


Yeah, hes okay. MJ is okay

For a lefty




HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 7:25:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Yeah, hes okay. MJ is okay

For a lefty

He still tries to bait people. But I haven't seen him being condicending in a couple of days. I still don't trust him though. When he quits trying to bait people I'll consider a reevaluation.




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 7:37:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


First off I call bull shit on you now. It's plain that the government is currently being run by corporations now. And the only people who have stated desires to stop it are the Tea Party and sick hateful idiots like the person we all have blocked. He wants the whole system to fail so the ensuing revolution will sweep his sick system into power. Good luck with that,,idiot, because the only people who own guns and can wage a revolution ain't on your side.



On me? Wow... Having a bad day are you?
Yes, it is plain that the government is currently being run by corporations. Has been for quite some time...

From the war profiteers:

Bechtel
Haliburton/KBR
ExxonMobil

To the banks
JPMorgan
Goldman Sachs

To Big Pharma for Medicare Part D
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Merck
AstraZeneca



quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
He's actually been the only one of you lefties who has been any where near truthful. Yet, when a Tea Party person is shown publicly to have never taken a fucking dime while in office, all of the little cloud boy's come out and ridicule him for not having enough money in the bank and vow to vote for Hillary who has been feeding in that pig shit for years.



One of you lefties? Tea Party person shown publicly to have never taken a dime while in office? Who would that be? (Just out of curiosity)

And that would make Hilary, better inoculated, albeit still a crappy choice for President

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
There are basically three decisions to make. Bill Clinton is the person who allowed all of the banks to merge to be too big to fail and he's gorging himself on that now. Obviously, it's time to bust a few monopolies and I don't see anyone on the left not waiting to get on the gravy train, so I don't see that happening if you idiots elect Hillary.



I can think of two off the top of my head:
1) Elizabeth Warren. She would break them up faster than you can type the word "idiot".
2) Ron Wyden

Keep in mind, Bill Clinton signed a Republican-sponsored bill (Gramm-Leach-Billey) to accomplish that. He also was succeeded by Bush, who kept driving us off the cliff (except much faster). (Upped sub-prime loan quota, and sextupled the national debt at the same time (I think sextuple is correct?))

When has a Tea Party person ever talked about busting up monopolies? The Tea Party is stuck on: "Debt. Bad. Freedom. Good."

Wait... Unless you mean the guy who STARTED the Tea Party? Ron Paul???
Yes he has talked about breaking up monopolies many times.


Good you promise to vote for Ron Wyeen. I don't believe for a minute that Pocohantas Warren will do anything. What's the best way to aquire things in the lefty victimology world? Be a higher status victim. Ol Pocohontus Warren has already shown us she wants in on the feeding frenzy and will do or say anything in order to get to the table.


Let me ask you where corporations having power is most likely to happen; in a huge bloated government or a small efficient government that is well regulated to do only what it is designed to do. You're never going to get the corruption out of a lefty loony designed big bloated, cradle to grave government. That's idiocy to even consider it. Additionally, when fewer people allowing to feed off the tit of the government and have to take personal responsibility there will be more people invested in watching how the goenernment functions. In a lefty loony government with people sitting on their ass waiting for the next dollop of "FREE" government give aways, that's how the feeding trough starts.


Pocohantas Warren???? Really??? She wants in on the feeding frenzy???? Which corporations are her major donors? (Looks like Emily's List. I promise to watch for huge tax subsidies to Emily's List!) She is dedicated to almost nothing, except fighting corporatism. And if she wants to keep asserting that she has Cherokee blood, let her. (Seems sketchy to me)

The answer about where corporations having power is most likely to happen...

Simple... True campaign finance reform.

UK style elections - A few weeks. Everyone gets x dollars to spend, and it's over.
All donations over a certain amount are public. ALEC (and any private organization (run by corporations and lobbyists) which actually writes legislation to be cut and pasted into state legislatures outlawed. Everyone has equal access to their rep or senator, and all visits are logged.

Clinton style backroom deals with various international entities WHILE acting as Secretary of State are outlawed (and enforced)

Oh, and while were at it... Get the states OUT of national elections. 1 election. 1 set of rules. Get rid of the Electoral College.


Verifiable results.


And as for the citizens... Anyone who has a stable income (from their own hard word, not a government handout), and is NOT feeding on the trough will have some time to keep an eye on government.





MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 7:45:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Yeah, hes okay. MJ is okay

For a lefty

He still tries to bait people. But I haven't seen him being condicending in a couple of days. I still don't trust him though. When he quits trying to bait people I'll consider a reevaluation.



<getting hook... putting worm on it>

And who was this Tea Party person, ready to take on corporatism, and "shown to never have taken an f***ing dime while in office?

I'd really love to know!




HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:03:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

I haven't been following the thread and I might be missing some of the context/timing when I say what I am about to say---the democratic party platform and the communist party platform share a great deal in common.

ive mentioned this before here and some of the forum comrades got all bent out of shape over that.

quote:

That was the theme of Horowitz’s speech as he continued: how the communists had taken over the Democratic Party. “The communist party is the Democratic Party,” Horowitz stated. “In The Great Gatsby, [F. Scott] Fitzgerald describes the rich as people who break things and leave them for others to clean up. That is a wonderful description of the left.” Horowitz, who began as a radical Marxist, said that the modern left had learned stealth from their failures in the 1960s: “The left have learned from the 1960s…we in the 1960s didn’t want to pretend to be Jeffersonian democrats…That’s why we failed in the 1960s. That’s why they’ve succeeded now.”

But the right, Horowitz pointed out, has failed to acknowledge that reality. On Obamacare, for example, Horowitz railed against the language used by the left: “single-payer.” Instead, he said, “it is communism,” pointing out that it was state ownership of the means of production. He added, “The left hate the Constitution because Madison designed it to thwart them.”...

Horowitz summed up pessimistically: “We are within reach of a totalitarian state in this country…These are very very dark days for this country.” But, Horowitz held out hope: “there’s been an earthquake on the conservative side since I switched sides…the tea party is the earthquake. The best thing that Republicans can do is stop the fratricide.”



http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2013/11/12/horowitz-blasts-left-heritage/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/962342/posts



Wow... This Horowitz guy beats some of the most moronic posts I have seen on here. Is there such a thing as a super moron? If there is, then David Horowitz embodies super-moronism.

Who reads this stuff?

He starts off with healthcare. A topic he knows nothing about. Single-payer is Communism???
Why do you say that? I might ask :)

His answer: "State ownership of the means of production" Ummmm....

Does he know what single-payer is??? Does he know that health insurance is NOT production?

I am no expert on Marx, but this guy clearly isn't either. Nor is he an expert on anything.


Obama, Horowitz claimed, is a deep believer in this concept, all the way down to his carpet in the Oval Office, which assures those who enter that the moral arc of the universe bends toward justice. “Leftism is a crypto-religion,” he explained. “They see themselves as a savior. People who believe that redemption will take place in this life and I will be a part of it, that’s Hitler. That’s Mao…That’s the American left.”

Yes. It's Obama's carpet that represents seeing himself as a savior. How profound!


Third, Horowitz said that the left was characterized by “alienation from this country… What weakens America is actually good.” Horowitz cited the Obama administration’s eager withdrawal from Iraq as evidence of that proposition:

Yes. Obama withdrew from Iraq to weaken America, because it's good! Nothing to do with the fact that his predecessor signed a deal for our troops to leave. No.

Nothing to do with the fact, that there was no exit strategy when we went in there. Nope.

Nothing to do, with the fact that there was noting militarily to accomplish at that point for our troops that would help long-term Iraqi stability. Nope.

Obama was thinking, "I want to weaken America, because it's good!"


People actually read this stuff and drink this kool-aid. I haven't met one, but I have seen them on TV!

As previously commented on, David Horowitz is an expert on communism. If you don't understand that what he is saying is literal, perhaps that's why you don't understand people in this country do want it to fall. Maybe you should investigate.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/just-radical-people-influenced-barack-hussein-obama/

quote:


Throughout his life, Obama worked with and for a variety of prominent communists and socialists. He served on numerous boards – such as the Woods Fund — with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, who calls himself a “small c communist.”
Obama launched his first campaign with a fundraiser at Bill Ayers’ house.
Obama’s father was a socialist economist for the Kenyan Government. His white mother was raised by socialists.
His African grandparents were socialists.
In Obama’s own biography, he says his main mentor from age 8 to 18 was Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying Communist Party leader (Party #47544) who hated everything America stood for. Davis practically raised Obama since, contrary to popular mythology, his father NEVER lived with him and his mother pretty much abandoned him. Moreover, Davis was involved in espionage against the West, as his FBI file indicates. Go here to read portions of it.


Lots of people who have known him in the past say he was always hard core communist. It upset them the news media gave him so little vetting during two presidential campaigns. But, the media wouldn't out him. There have even been comments from conservative professors who worked with him at U. Of C.

Haven't seen the carpet, no comment.



What weakens the U.S. Is a normal tenant of the far left. It stems from the theory that the "Western (old white men) Imperialism (their words) from 1500 to 1800" enslaved all of the brown people in the world and that has created all of the evil in the world. That, not until all of the brown people in the world have equal stuff to what the U.S. has will there be Justice in the world. It's, in their mind, easier to destroy the U.S. (They expect a workers revolution...reference MNwhatever yesterday will do it). America, in their mind is the imperialist now and must be toppled for true Justice to come to the world. No shit MJ. Not kidding. Obama, if you payed attention believes the U.S. Must withdraw from the world, loss it's place and stop being imperialist, and become no more or no less than any country. He doesn't want the US to be a world policeman. He ran on ending the wars. The reason he won't fix ISIS is because he believes that would be imperialism.

Obama could have kept troops in Iraq for stability but he believes that would be imperialist. Come on MJ, his entire campaing revolved around getting out of the Middle East. He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.











MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:04:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


First off I call bull shit on you now. It's plain that the government is currently being run by corporations now. And the only people who have stated desires to stop it are the Tea Party and sick hateful idiots like the person we all have blocked. He wants the whole system to fail so the ensuing revolution will sweep his sick system into power. Good luck with that,,idiot, because the only people who own guns and can wage a revolution ain't on your side.



On me? Wow... Having a bad day are you?
Yes, it is plain that the government is currently being run by corporations. Has been for quite some time...

From the war profiteers:

Bechtel
Haliburton/KBR
ExxonMobil

To the banks
JPMorgan
Goldman Sachs

To Big Pharma for Medicare Part D
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Merck
AstraZeneca



quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
He's actually been the only one of you lefties who has been any where near truthful. Yet, when a Tea Party person is shown publicly to have never taken a fucking dime while in office, all of the little cloud boy's come out and ridicule him for not having enough money in the bank and vow to vote for Hillary who has been feeding in that pig shit for years.



One of you lefties? Tea Party person shown publicly to have never taken a dime while in office? Who would that be? (Just out of curiosity)

And that would make Hilary, better inoculated, albeit still a crappy choice for President

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
There are basically three decisions to make. Bill Clinton is the person who allowed all of the banks to merge to be too big to fail and he's gorging himself on that now. Obviously, it's time to bust a few monopolies and I don't see anyone on the left not waiting to get on the gravy train, so I don't see that happening if you idiots elect Hillary.



I can think of two off the top of my head:
1) Elizabeth Warren. She would break them up faster than you can type the word "idiot".
2) Ron Wyden

Keep in mind, Bill Clinton signed a Republican-sponsored bill (Gramm-Leach-Billey) to accomplish that. He also was succeeded by Bush, who kept driving us off the cliff (except much faster). (Upped sub-prime loan quota, and sextupled the national debt at the same time (I think sextuple is correct?))

When has a Tea Party person ever talked about busting up monopolies? The Tea Party is stuck on: "Debt. Bad. Freedom. Good."

Wait... Unless you mean the guy who STARTED the Tea Party? Ron Paul???
Yes he has talked about breaking up monopolies many times.


Good you promise to vote for Ron Wyeen. I don't believe for a minute that Pocohantas Warren will do anything. What's the best way to aquire things in the lefty victimology world? Be a higher status victim. Ol Pocohontus Warren has already shown us she wants in on the feeding frenzy and will do or say anything in order to get to the table.


Let me ask you where corporations having power is most likely to happen; in a huge bloated government or a small efficient government that is well regulated to do only what it is designed to do. You're never going to get the corruption out of a lefty loony designed big bloated, cradle to grave government. That's idiocy to even consider it. Additionally, when fewer people allowing to feed off the tit of the government and have to take personal responsibility there will be more people invested in watching how the goenernment functions. In a lefty loony government with people sitting on their ass waiting for the next dollop of "FREE" government give aways, that's how the feeding trough starts.


Pocohantas Warren???? Really??? She wants in on the feeding frenzy???? Which corporations are her major donors? (Looks like Emily's List. I promise to watch for huge tax subsidies to Emily's List!) She is dedicated to almost nothing, except fighting corporatism. And if she wants to keep asserting that she has Cherokee blood, let her. (Seems sketchy to me)

The answer about where corporations having power is most likely to happen...

Simple... True campaign finance reform.

UK style elections - A few weeks. Everyone gets x dollars to spend, and it's over.
All donations over a certain amount are public. ALEC (and any private organization (run by corporations and lobbyists) which actually writes legislation to be cut and pasted into state legislatures outlawed. Everyone has equal access to their rep or senator, and all visits are logged.

Clinton style backroom deals with various international entities WHILE acting as Secretary of State are outlawed (and enforced)

Oh, and while were at it... Get the states OUT of national elections. 1 election. 1 set of rules. Get rid of the Electoral College.


Verifiable results.


And as for the citizens... Anyone who has a stable income (from their own hard word, not a government handout), and is NOT feeding on the trough will have some time to keep an eye on government.





quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
I promise to watch for huge tax subsidies to Emily's List!


Ummmm Paw in mouth. I was thinking of Angie's list.

Emily's list is a 501c3. Tons of tax subsidies already.


That's another thing... MUCH greater restrictions on 501c3's.

Get RID of 501c4 completely or enforce the reg. Everyone "targeted" by the IRS was scamming the 501(c4)4 regs! They are not "Social Welfare" orgs or "Local associations of employees"

I don't care if you are left, right, or center... If you want to give to a political org, go ahead. But I don't want to subsidize it with my tax money (by YOU getting to write it off) OR by the org being exempt from paying taxes!

That includes Emily's List. Why do they get to be a 501(c)3???




HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:11:08 PM)

Could have left a stabilizing force in Iraq.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/may/18/jeb-bush/obama-refused-sign-plan-place-leave-10000-troops-i/


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0




HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:14:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


First off I call bull shit on you now. It's plain that the government is currently being run by corporations now. And the only people who have stated desires to stop it are the Tea Party and sick hateful idiots like the person we all have blocked. He wants the whole system to fail so the ensuing revolution will sweep his sick system into power. Good luck with that,,idiot, because the only people who own guns and can wage a revolution ain't on your side.



On me? Wow... Having a bad day are you?
Yes, it is plain that the government is currently being run by corporations. Has been for quite some time...

From the war profiteers:

Bechtel
Haliburton/KBR
ExxonMobil

To the banks
JPMorgan
Goldman Sachs

To Big Pharma for Medicare Part D
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Merck
AstraZeneca



quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
He's actually been the only one of you lefties who has been any where near truthful. Yet, when a Tea Party person is shown publicly to have never taken a fucking dime while in office, all of the little cloud boy's come out and ridicule him for not having enough money in the bank and vow to vote for Hillary who has been feeding in that pig shit for years.



One of you lefties? Tea Party person shown publicly to have never taken a dime while in office? Who would that be? (Just out of curiosity)

And that would make Hilary, better inoculated, albeit still a crappy choice for President

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
There are basically three decisions to make. Bill Clinton is the person who allowed all of the banks to merge to be too big to fail and he's gorging himself on that now. Obviously, it's time to bust a few monopolies and I don't see anyone on the left not waiting to get on the gravy train, so I don't see that happening if you idiots elect Hillary.



I can think of two off the top of my head:
1) Elizabeth Warren. She would break them up faster than you can type the word "idiot".
2) Ron Wyden

Keep in mind, Bill Clinton signed a Republican-sponsored bill (Gramm-Leach-Billey) to accomplish that. He also was succeeded by Bush, who kept driving us off the cliff (except much faster). (Upped sub-prime loan quota, and sextupled the national debt at the same time (I think sextuple is correct?))

When has a Tea Party person ever talked about busting up monopolies? The Tea Party is stuck on: "Debt. Bad. Freedom. Good."

Wait... Unless you mean the guy who STARTED the Tea Party? Ron Paul???
Yes he has talked about breaking up monopolies many times.


Good you promise to vote for Ron Wyeen. I don't believe for a minute that Pocohantas Warren will do anything. What's the best way to aquire things in the lefty victimology world? Be a higher status victim. Ol Pocohontus Warren has already shown us she wants in on the feeding frenzy and will do or say anything in order to get to the table.


Let me ask you where corporations having power is most likely to happen; in a huge bloated government or a small efficient government that is well regulated to do only what it is designed to do. You're never going to get the corruption out of a lefty loony designed big bloated, cradle to grave government. That's idiocy to even consider it. Additionally, when fewer people allowing to feed off the tit of the government and have to take personal responsibility there will be more people invested in watching how the goenernment functions. In a lefty loony government with people sitting on their ass waiting for the next dollop of "FREE" government give aways, that's how the feeding trough starts.


Pocohantas Warren???? Really??? She wants in on the feeding frenzy???? Which corporations are her major donors? (Looks like Emily's List. I promise to watch for huge tax subsidies to Emily's List!) She is dedicated to almost nothing, except fighting corporatism. And if she wants to keep asserting that she has Cherokee blood, let her. (Seems sketchy to me)

The answer about where corporations having power is most likely to happen...

Simple... True campaign finance reform.

UK style elections - A few weeks. Everyone gets x dollars to spend, and it's over.
All donations over a certain amount are public. ALEC (and any private organization (run by corporations and lobbyists) which actually writes legislation to be cut and pasted into state legislatures outlawed. Everyone has equal access to their rep or senator, and all visits are logged.

Clinton style backroom deals with various international entities WHILE acting as Secretary of State are outlawed (and enforced)

Oh, and while were at it... Get the states OUT of national elections. 1 election. 1 set of rules. Get rid of the Electoral College.


Verifiable results.


And as for the citizens... Anyone who has a stable income (from their own hard word, not a government handout), and is NOT feeding on the trough will have some time to keep an eye on government.



Are you going to tell me that a woman who'd lie and say she was an Indian in order to get into Harvard, as well as other perks, will push away from the trough when her chance comes to feed from it. BS. Obviously what she says means nothing.




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:18:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

I haven't been following the thread and I might be missing some of the context/timing when I say what I am about to say---the democratic party platform and the communist party platform share a great deal in common.

ive mentioned this before here and some of the forum comrades got all bent out of shape over that.

quote:

That was the theme of Horowitz’s speech as he continued: how the communists had taken over the Democratic Party. “The communist party is the Democratic Party,” Horowitz stated. “In The Great Gatsby, [F. Scott] Fitzgerald describes the rich as people who break things and leave them for others to clean up. That is a wonderful description of the left.” Horowitz, who began as a radical Marxist, said that the modern left had learned stealth from their failures in the 1960s: “The left have learned from the 1960s…we in the 1960s didn’t want to pretend to be Jeffersonian democrats…That’s why we failed in the 1960s. That’s why they’ve succeeded now.”

But the right, Horowitz pointed out, has failed to acknowledge that reality. On Obamacare, for example, Horowitz railed against the language used by the left: “single-payer.” Instead, he said, “it is communism,” pointing out that it was state ownership of the means of production. He added, “The left hate the Constitution because Madison designed it to thwart them.”...

Horowitz summed up pessimistically: “We are within reach of a totalitarian state in this country…These are very very dark days for this country.” But, Horowitz held out hope: “there’s been an earthquake on the conservative side since I switched sides…the tea party is the earthquake. The best thing that Republicans can do is stop the fratricide.”



http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2013/11/12/horowitz-blasts-left-heritage/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/962342/posts



Wow... This Horowitz guy beats some of the most moronic posts I have seen on here. Is there such a thing as a super moron? If there is, then David Horowitz embodies super-moronism.

Who reads this stuff?

He starts off with healthcare. A topic he knows nothing about. Single-payer is Communism???
Why do you say that? I might ask :)

His answer: "State ownership of the means of production" Ummmm....

Does he know what single-payer is??? Does he know that health insurance is NOT production?

I am no expert on Marx, but this guy clearly isn't either. Nor is he an expert on anything.


Obama, Horowitz claimed, is a deep believer in this concept, all the way down to his carpet in the Oval Office, which assures those who enter that the moral arc of the universe bends toward justice. “Leftism is a crypto-religion,” he explained. “They see themselves as a savior. People who believe that redemption will take place in this life and I will be a part of it, that’s Hitler. That’s Mao…That’s the American left.”

Yes. It's Obama's carpet that represents seeing himself as a savior. How profound!


Third, Horowitz said that the left was characterized by “alienation from this country… What weakens America is actually good.” Horowitz cited the Obama administration’s eager withdrawal from Iraq as evidence of that proposition:

Yes. Obama withdrew from Iraq to weaken America, because it's good! Nothing to do with the fact that his predecessor signed a deal for our troops to leave. No.

Nothing to do with the fact, that there was no exit strategy when we went in there. Nope.

Nothing to do, with the fact that there was noting militarily to accomplish at that point for our troops that would help long-term Iraqi stability. Nope.

Obama was thinking, "I want to weaken America, because it's good!"


People actually read this stuff and drink this kool-aid. I haven't met one, but I have seen them on TV!

As previously commented on, David Horowitz is an expert on communism. If you don't understand that what he is saying is literal, perhaps that's why you don't understand people in this country do want it to fall. Maybe you should investigate.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/just-radical-people-influenced-barack-hussein-obama/

quote:


Throughout his life, Obama worked with and for a variety of prominent communists and socialists. He served on numerous boards – such as the Woods Fund — with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, who calls himself a “small c communist.”
Obama launched his first campaign with a fundraiser at Bill Ayers’ house.
Obama’s father was a socialist economist for the Kenyan Government. His white mother was raised by socialists.
His African grandparents were socialists.
In Obama’s own biography, he says his main mentor from age 8 to 18 was Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying Communist Party leader (Party #47544) who hated everything America stood for. Davis practically raised Obama since, contrary to popular mythology, his father NEVER lived with him and his mother pretty much abandoned him. Moreover, Davis was involved in espionage against the West, as his FBI file indicates. Go here to read portions of it.


Lots of people who have known him in the past say he was always hard core communist. It upset them the news media gave him so little vetting during two presidential campaigns. But, the media wouldn't out him. There have even been comments from conservative professors who worked with him at U. Of C.

Haven't seen the carpet, no comment.



What weakens the U.S. Is a normal tenant of the far left. It stems from the theory that the "Western (old white men) Imperialism (their words) from 1500 to 1800" enslaved all of the brown people in the world and that has created all of the evil in the world. That, not until all of the brown people in the world have equal stuff to what the U.S. has will there be Justice in the world. It's, in their mind, easier to destroy the U.S. (They expect a workers revolution...reference MNwhatever yesterday will do it). America, in their mind is the imperialist now and must be toppled for true Justice to come to the world. No shit MJ. Not kidding. Obama, if you payed attention believes the U.S. Must withdraw from the world, loss it's place and stop being imperialist, and become no more or no less than any country. He doesn't want the US to be a world policeman. He ran on ending the wars. The reason he won't fix ISIS is because he believes that would be imperialism.

Obama could have kept troops in Iraq for stability but he believes that would be imperialist. Come on MJ, his entire campaing revolved around getting out of the Middle East. He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.











Obama could have kept troops in Iraq for stability but he believes that would be imperialist. Come on MJ, his entire campaing revolved around getting out of the Middle East. He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.

No... U.S. Troops remaining in Iraq, would provide no lasting stability. The surge, which included bribing the Sunnis not to attack us, was getting old. Sunnis were still disaffected in a Shia-controlled government, and ripe for Al Qaeda, ISIS, or whomever, even MUCH MORE so as U.S. troops become a target. Our military is designed to fight wars, not to provide stability. Providing stability is a diplomatic and political mission. (Not a military one).

He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.
Interesting. And you know what he believes?

One other comment... I call B.S. on Obama, who now says he wanted to leave 10,000 troops in Iraq, but didn't ONLY because Bush signed an agreement to remove all forces. He CAMPAIGNED on removing troops from Iraq! He is getting a bit revisionist.




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:24:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Could have left a stabilizing force in Iraq.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/may/18/jeb-bush/obama-refused-sign-plan-place-leave-10000-troops-i/


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0



From your first link:

Obama inherited a timeline to exit Iraq from George W. Bush and followed it, but there was no agreement to leave a large force behind.




HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:26:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


First off I call bull shit on you now. It's plain that the government is currently being run by corporations now. And the only people who have stated desires to stop it are the Tea Party and sick hateful idiots like the person we all have blocked. He wants the whole system to fail so the ensuing revolution will sweep his sick system into power. Good luck with that,,idiot, because the only people who own guns and can wage a revolution ain't on your side.



On me? Wow... Having a bad day are you?
Yes, it is plain that the government is currently being run by corporations. Has been for quite some time...

From the war profiteers:

Bechtel
Haliburton/KBR
ExxonMobil

To the banks
JPMorgan
Goldman Sachs

To Big Pharma for Medicare Part D
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Merck
AstraZeneca



quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
He's actually been the only one of you lefties who has been any where near truthful. Yet, when a Tea Party person is shown publicly to have never taken a fucking dime while in office, all of the little cloud boy's come out and ridicule him for not having enough money in the bank and vow to vote for Hillary who has been feeding in that pig shit for years.



One of you lefties? Tea Party person shown publicly to have never taken a dime while in office? Who would that be? (Just out of curiosity)

And that would make Hilary, better inoculated, albeit still a crappy choice for President

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
There are basically three decisions to make. Bill Clinton is the person who allowed all of the banks to merge to be too big to fail and he's gorging himself on that now. Obviously, it's time to bust a few monopolies and I don't see anyone on the left not waiting to get on the gravy train, so I don't see that happening if you idiots elect Hillary.



I can think of two off the top of my head:
1) Elizabeth Warren. She would break them up faster than you can type the word "idiot".
2) Ron Wyden

Keep in mind, Bill Clinton signed a Republican-sponsored bill (Gramm-Leach-Billey) to accomplish that. He also was succeeded by Bush, who kept driving us off the cliff (except much faster). (Upped sub-prime loan quota, and sextupled the national debt at the same time (I think sextuple is correct?))

When has a Tea Party person ever talked about busting up monopolies? The Tea Party is stuck on: "Debt. Bad. Freedom. Good."

Wait... Unless you mean the guy who STARTED the Tea Party? Ron Paul???
Yes he has talked about breaking up monopolies many times.


Good you promise to vote for Ron Wyeen. I don't believe for a minute that Pocohantas Warren will do anything. What's the best way to aquire things in the lefty victimology world? Be a higher status victim. Ol Pocohontus Warren has already shown us she wants in on the feeding frenzy and will do or say anything in order to get to the table.


Let me ask you where corporations having power is most likely to happen; in a huge bloated government or a small efficient government that is well regulated to do only what it is designed to do. You're never going to get the corruption out of a lefty loony designed big bloated, cradle to grave government. That's idiocy to even consider it. Additionally, when fewer people allowing to feed off the tit of the government and have to take personal responsibility there will be more people invested in watching how the goenernment functions. In a lefty loony government with people sitting on their ass waiting for the next dollop of "FREE" government give aways, that's how the feeding trough starts.


Pocohantas Warren???? Really??? She wants in on the feeding frenzy???? Which corporations are her major donors? (Looks like Emily's List. I promise to watch for huge tax subsidies to Emily's List!) She is dedicated to almost nothing, except fighting corporatism. And if she wants to keep asserting that she has Cherokee blood, let her. (Seems sketchy to me)

The answer about where corporations having power is most likely to happen...

Simple... True campaign finance reform.

UK style elections - A few weeks. Everyone gets x dollars to spend, and it's over.
All donations over a certain amount are public. ALEC (and any private organization (run by corporations and lobbyists) which actually writes legislation to be cut and pasted into state legislatures outlawed. Everyone has equal access to their rep or senator, and all visits are logged.

Clinton style backroom deals with various international entities WHILE acting as Secretary of State are outlawed (and enforced)

Oh, and while were at it... Get the states OUT of national elections. 1 election. 1 set of rules. Get rid of the Electoral College.


Verifiable results.


And as for the citizens... Anyone who has a stable income (from their own hard word, not a government handout), and is NOT feeding on the trough will have some time to keep an eye on government.





quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
I promise to watch for huge tax subsidies to Emily's List!


Ummmm Paw in mouth. I was thinking of Angie's list.

Emily's list is a 501c3. Tons of tax subsidies already.


That's another thing... MUCH greater restrictions on 501c3's.

Get RID of 501c4 completely or enforce the reg. Everyone "targeted" by the IRS was scamming the 501(c4)4 regs! They are not "Social Welfare" orgs or "Local associations of employees"

I don't care if you are left, right, or center... If you want to give to a political org, go ahead. But I don't want to subsidize it with my tax money (by YOU getting to write it off) OR by the org being exempt from paying taxes!

That includes Emily's List. Why do they get to be a 501(c)3???

http://elizabethwarrenwiki.org/elizabeth-warren-native-american-cherokee-controversy/

quote:

Soon after the Boston Herald report, information was uncovered[8] by George Mason University Law School Professor David Bernstein[9] that starting in the mid-1980s, when she was at U. Penn. Law School, Warren had put herself on the “Minority Law Teacher” list in the faculty directory of the Association of American Law Schools but dro - See more at: http://elizabethwarrenwiki.org/elizabeth-warren-native-american-cherokee-controversy/#sthash.HcXaji3A.dpuf


quote:

When confronted with this information, Warren admitted[12] she had filled out forms listing herself as Native American, claiming she wanted to meet other Native Americans - See more at: http://elizabethwarrenwiki.org/elizabeth-warren-native-american-cherokee-controversy/#sthash.HcXaji3A.dpuf


quote:

Investigative reporter Michael Patrick Leahy of Breitbart.com uncovered that in 1993, when Warren was a Visiting Professor at Harvard Law School, the Harvard Women’s Law Journal included Warren on a list of Women of Color in Legal Academia.[19] It was the policy of the Law Journal to check with the persons on the list before they were listed. - See more at: http://elizabethwarrenwiki.org/elizabeth-warren-native-american-cherokee-controversy/#sthash.HcXaji3A.dpuf


quote:

When confronted by reporters, Warren claimed not to know why Harvard[6] was promoting her as Native American, and said that she only learned of it by reading the newspaper reports.[7] - See more at: http://elizabethwarrenwiki.org/elizabeth-warren-native-american-cherokee-controversy/#sthash.HcXaji3A.dpuf




bounty44 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:28:48 PM)

in response to the little bit of david horowitz bashing earlier:

he's written ~39 books on social and political philosophy/science and practice. many works of his have been translated into a half dozen different languages.

he's co-authored another 15 or so books and has served as editor and contributor for a large handful of academic pieces.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/bibliography/

quote:

Cultural critic Camille Paglia has said of David Horowitz: “I respect the astute and rigorously unsentimental David Horowitz as one of America’s most original and courageous political analysts. . . . As a scholar who regularly surveys archival material, I think that, a century from now, cultural historians will find David Horowitz’s spiritual and political odyssey paradigmatic for our time.”


quote:

Norman Podhoretz, former editor of Commentary magazine, says of Horowitz: “He differs from some of the other ‘second-thoughts’ generation in having pulled no punches and in having broken more decisively than some of them with left-wing pieties — whether liberal or socialist. . . . David Horowitz is hated by the Left because he is not only an apostate but has been even more relentless and aggressive in attacking his former political allies than some of us who preceded him in what I once called ‘breaking ranks’ with that world. He has also taken the polemical and organizational techniques he learned in his days on the left, and figured out how to use them against the Left, whose vulnerabilities he knows in his bones. (That he is such a good writer and speaker doesn’t hurt, either.) In fact, he has done so much, and in so many different ways, that one might be justified in suspecting that ‘David Horowitz’ is actually more than one person.”


http://www.frontpagemag.com/biography/

if there is another person out there who knows this stuff better than david horowitz, I don't know who it is.

anyone blithely dismissing him as a "moron" should be ashamed to do so.

that said---horowitz aside--the point of my original post here was about the similarities between the communist and democratic party platforms.








HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:30:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Could have left a stabilizing force in Iraq.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/may/18/jeb-bush/obama-refused-sign-plan-place-leave-10000-troops-i/


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0



From your first link:

Obama inherited a timeline to exit Iraq from George W. Bush and followed it, but there was no agreement to leave a large force behind.

And the second link from the lefty NYT discusses that in detail. Everybody believed the negotiations were ongoing and what was publicly said was a typical Iraqis public comment until a final deal was hammered out.




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:30:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

I haven't been following the thread and I might be missing some of the context/timing when I say what I am about to say---the democratic party platform and the communist party platform share a great deal in common.

ive mentioned this before here and some of the forum comrades got all bent out of shape over that.

quote:

That was the theme of Horowitz’s speech as he continued: how the communists had taken over the Democratic Party. “The communist party is the Democratic Party,” Horowitz stated. “In The Great Gatsby, [F. Scott] Fitzgerald describes the rich as people who break things and leave them for others to clean up. That is a wonderful description of the left.” Horowitz, who began as a radical Marxist, said that the modern left had learned stealth from their failures in the 1960s: “The left have learned from the 1960s…we in the 1960s didn’t want to pretend to be Jeffersonian democrats…That’s why we failed in the 1960s. That’s why they’ve succeeded now.”

But the right, Horowitz pointed out, has failed to acknowledge that reality. On Obamacare, for example, Horowitz railed against the language used by the left: “single-payer.” Instead, he said, “it is communism,” pointing out that it was state ownership of the means of production. He added, “The left hate the Constitution because Madison designed it to thwart them.”...

Horowitz summed up pessimistically: “We are within reach of a totalitarian state in this country…These are very very dark days for this country.” But, Horowitz held out hope: “there’s been an earthquake on the conservative side since I switched sides…the tea party is the earthquake. The best thing that Republicans can do is stop the fratricide.”



http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2013/11/12/horowitz-blasts-left-heritage/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/962342/posts



Wow... This Horowitz guy beats some of the most moronic posts I have seen on here. Is there such a thing as a super moron? If there is, then David Horowitz embodies super-moronism.

Who reads this stuff?

He starts off with healthcare. A topic he knows nothing about. Single-payer is Communism???
Why do you say that? I might ask :)

His answer: "State ownership of the means of production" Ummmm....

Does he know what single-payer is??? Does he know that health insurance is NOT production?

I am no expert on Marx, but this guy clearly isn't either. Nor is he an expert on anything.


Obama, Horowitz claimed, is a deep believer in this concept, all the way down to his carpet in the Oval Office, which assures those who enter that the moral arc of the universe bends toward justice. “Leftism is a crypto-religion,” he explained. “They see themselves as a savior. People who believe that redemption will take place in this life and I will be a part of it, that’s Hitler. That’s Mao…That’s the American left.”

Yes. It's Obama's carpet that represents seeing himself as a savior. How profound!


Third, Horowitz said that the left was characterized by “alienation from this country… What weakens America is actually good.” Horowitz cited the Obama administration’s eager withdrawal from Iraq as evidence of that proposition:

Yes. Obama withdrew from Iraq to weaken America, because it's good! Nothing to do with the fact that his predecessor signed a deal for our troops to leave. No.

Nothing to do with the fact, that there was no exit strategy when we went in there. Nope.

Nothing to do, with the fact that there was noting militarily to accomplish at that point for our troops that would help long-term Iraqi stability. Nope.

Obama was thinking, "I want to weaken America, because it's good!"


People actually read this stuff and drink this kool-aid. I haven't met one, but I have seen them on TV!

As previously commented on, David Horowitz is an expert on communism. If you don't understand that what he is saying is literal, perhaps that's why you don't understand people in this country do want it to fall. Maybe you should investigate.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/just-radical-people-influenced-barack-hussein-obama/

quote:


Throughout his life, Obama worked with and for a variety of prominent communists and socialists. He served on numerous boards – such as the Woods Fund — with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, who calls himself a “small c communist.”
Obama launched his first campaign with a fundraiser at Bill Ayers’ house.
Obama’s father was a socialist economist for the Kenyan Government. His white mother was raised by socialists.
His African grandparents were socialists.
In Obama’s own biography, he says his main mentor from age 8 to 18 was Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying Communist Party leader (Party #47544) who hated everything America stood for. Davis practically raised Obama since, contrary to popular mythology, his father NEVER lived with him and his mother pretty much abandoned him. Moreover, Davis was involved in espionage against the West, as his FBI file indicates. Go here to read portions of it.


Lots of people who have known him in the past say he was always hard core communist. It upset them the news media gave him so little vetting during two presidential campaigns. But, the media wouldn't out him. There have even been comments from conservative professors who worked with him at U. Of C.

Haven't seen the carpet, no comment.



What weakens the U.S. Is a normal tenant of the far left. It stems from the theory that the "Western (old white men) Imperialism (their words) from 1500 to 1800" enslaved all of the brown people in the world and that has created all of the evil in the world. That, not until all of the brown people in the world have equal stuff to what the U.S. has will there be Justice in the world. It's, in their mind, easier to destroy the U.S. (They expect a workers revolution...reference MNwhatever yesterday will do it). America, in their mind is the imperialist now and must be toppled for true Justice to come to the world. No shit MJ. Not kidding. Obama, if you payed attention believes the U.S. Must withdraw from the world, loss it's place and stop being imperialist, and become no more or no less than any country. He doesn't want the US to be a world policeman. He ran on ending the wars. The reason he won't fix ISIS is because he believes that would be imperialism.

Obama could have kept troops in Iraq for stability but he believes that would be imperialist. Come on MJ, his entire campaing revolved around getting out of the Middle East. He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.











Obama could have kept troops in Iraq for stability but he believes that would be imperialist. Come on MJ, his entire campaing revolved around getting out of the Middle East. He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.

No... U.S. Troops remaining in Iraq, would provide no lasting stability. The surge, which included bribing the Sunnis not to attack us, was getting old. Sunnis were still disaffected in a Shia-controlled government, and ripe for Al Qaeda, ISIS, or whomever, even MUCH MORE so as U.S. troops become a target. Our military is designed to fight wars, not to provide stability. Providing stability is a diplomatic and political mission. (Not a military one).

He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.
Interesting. And you know what he believes?

One other comment... I call B.S. on Obama, who now says he wanted to leave 10,000 troops in Iraq, but didn't ONLY because Bush signed an agreement to remove all forces. He CAMPAIGNED on removing troops from Iraq! He is getting a bit revisionist.



Many sources say he considered leaving 10,000 troops in Iraq, but I am skeptical that Bush's timeline was only reason it didn't happen.




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:35:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

in response to the little bit of david horowitz bashing earlier:

he's written ~39 books on social and political philosophy/science and practice. many works of his have been translated into a half dozen different languages.

he's co-authored another 15 or so books and has served as editor and contributor for a large handful of academic pieces.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/bibliography/

quote:

Cultural critic Camille Paglia has said of David Horowitz: “I respect the astute and rigorously unsentimental David Horowitz as one of America’s most original and courageous political analysts. . . . As a scholar who regularly surveys archival material, I think that, a century from now, cultural historians will find David Horowitz’s spiritual and political odyssey paradigmatic for our time.”


quote:

Norman Podhoretz, former editor of Commentary magazine, says of Horowitz: “He differs from some of the other ‘second-thoughts’ generation in having pulled no punches and in having broken more decisively than some of them with left-wing pieties — whether liberal or socialist. . . . David Horowitz is hated by the Left because he is not only an apostate but has been even more relentless and aggressive in attacking his former political allies than some of us who preceded him in what I once called ‘breaking ranks’ with that world. He has also taken the polemical and organizational techniques he learned in his days on the left, and figured out how to use them against the Left, whose vulnerabilities he knows in his bones. (That he is such a good writer and speaker doesn’t hurt, either.) In fact, he has done so much, and in so many different ways, that one might be justified in suspecting that ‘David Horowitz’ is actually more than one person.”


http://www.frontpagemag.com/biography/

if there is another person out there who knows this stuff better than david horowitz, I don't know who it is.

anyone blithely dismissing him as a "moron" should be ashamed to do so.

that said---horowitz aside--the point of my original post here was about the similarities between the communist and democratic party platforms.








I dismissed him as a moron because he states his wild and absurd opinions as fact (they appear moronic to me... Perhaps I am misusing the word), and says things that are demonstrably false.




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 8:42:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Could have left a stabilizing force in Iraq.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/may/18/jeb-bush/obama-refused-sign-plan-place-leave-10000-troops-i/


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0



From your first link:

Obama inherited a timeline to exit Iraq from George W. Bush and followed it, but there was no agreement to leave a large force behind.

And the second link from the lefty NYT discusses that in detail. Everybody believed the negotiations were ongoing and what was publicly said was a typical Iraqis public comment until a final deal was hammered out.



The second link is exactly my understanding of the events. There were discussions about leaving troops. Some in the Iraqi government wanted U.S. troops. Maliki was reluctant, mainly because he didn't want to give them immunity.

If anything, THIS link refutes your claim, that Obama wanted to withdraw because he felt that would be imperialist.

I am not sure of what point you are trying to make with this??




HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 9:00:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

I haven't been following the thread and I might be missing some of the context/timing when I say what I am about to say---the democratic party platform and the communist party platform share a great deal in common.

ive mentioned this before here and some of the forum comrades got all bent out of shape over that.

quote:

That was the theme of Horowitz’s speech as he continued: how the communists had taken over the Democratic Party. “The communist party is the Democratic Party,” Horowitz stated. “In The Great Gatsby, [F. Scott] Fitzgerald describes the rich as people who break things and leave them for others to clean up. That is a wonderful description of the left.” Horowitz, who began as a radical Marxist, said that the modern left had learned stealth from their failures in the 1960s: “The left have learned from the 1960s…we in the 1960s didn’t want to pretend to be Jeffersonian democrats…That’s why we failed in the 1960s. That’s why they’ve succeeded now.”

But the right, Horowitz pointed out, has failed to acknowledge that reality. On Obamacare, for example, Horowitz railed against the language used by the left: “single-payer.” Instead, he said, “it is communism,” pointing out that it was state ownership of the means of production. He added, “The left hate the Constitution because Madison designed it to thwart them.”...

Horowitz summed up pessimistically: “We are within reach of a totalitarian state in this country…These are very very dark days for this country.” But, Horowitz held out hope: “there’s been an earthquake on the conservative side since I switched sides…the tea party is the earthquake. The best thing that Republicans can do is stop the fratricide.”



http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2013/11/12/horowitz-blasts-left-heritage/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/962342/posts



Wow... This Horowitz guy beats some of the most moronic posts I have seen on here. Is there such a thing as a super moron? If there is, then David Horowitz embodies super-moronism.

Who reads this stuff?

He starts off with healthcare. A topic he knows nothing about. Single-payer is Communism???
Why do you say that? I might ask :)

His answer: "State ownership of the means of production" Ummmm....

Does he know what single-payer is??? Does he know that health insurance is NOT production?

I am no expert on Marx, but this guy clearly isn't either. Nor is he an expert on anything.


Obama, Horowitz claimed, is a deep believer in this concept, all the way down to his carpet in the Oval Office, which assures those who enter that the moral arc of the universe bends toward justice. “Leftism is a crypto-religion,” he explained. “They see themselves as a savior. People who believe that redemption will take place in this life and I will be a part of it, that’s Hitler. That’s Mao…That’s the American left.”

Yes. It's Obama's carpet that represents seeing himself as a savior. How profound!


Third, Horowitz said that the left was characterized by “alienation from this country… What weakens America is actually good.” Horowitz cited the Obama administration’s eager withdrawal from Iraq as evidence of that proposition:

Yes. Obama withdrew from Iraq to weaken America, because it's good! Nothing to do with the fact that his predecessor signed a deal for our troops to leave. No.

Nothing to do with the fact, that there was no exit strategy when we went in there. Nope.

Nothing to do, with the fact that there was noting militarily to accomplish at that point for our troops that would help long-term Iraqi stability. Nope.

Obama was thinking, "I want to weaken America, because it's good!"


People actually read this stuff and drink this kool-aid. I haven't met one, but I have seen them on TV!

As previously commented on, David Horowitz is an expert on communism. If you don't understand that what he is saying is literal, perhaps that's why you don't understand people in this country do want it to fall. Maybe you should investigate.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/just-radical-people-influenced-barack-hussein-obama/

quote:


Throughout his life, Obama worked with and for a variety of prominent communists and socialists. He served on numerous boards – such as the Woods Fund — with Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, who calls himself a “small c communist.”
Obama launched his first campaign with a fundraiser at Bill Ayers’ house.
Obama’s father was a socialist economist for the Kenyan Government. His white mother was raised by socialists.
His African grandparents were socialists.
In Obama’s own biography, he says his main mentor from age 8 to 18 was Frank Marshall Davis, a card-carrying Communist Party leader (Party #47544) who hated everything America stood for. Davis practically raised Obama since, contrary to popular mythology, his father NEVER lived with him and his mother pretty much abandoned him. Moreover, Davis was involved in espionage against the West, as his FBI file indicates. Go here to read portions of it.


Lots of people who have known him in the past say he was always hard core communist. It upset them the news media gave him so little vetting during two presidential campaigns. But, the media wouldn't out him. There have even been comments from conservative professors who worked with him at U. Of C.

Haven't seen the carpet, no comment.



What weakens the U.S. Is a normal tenant of the far left. It stems from the theory that the "Western (old white men) Imperialism (their words) from 1500 to 1800" enslaved all of the brown people in the world and that has created all of the evil in the world. That, not until all of the brown people in the world have equal stuff to what the U.S. has will there be Justice in the world. It's, in their mind, easier to destroy the U.S. (They expect a workers revolution...reference MNwhatever yesterday will do it). America, in their mind is the imperialist now and must be toppled for true Justice to come to the world. No shit MJ. Not kidding. Obama, if you payed attention believes the U.S. Must withdraw from the world, loss it's place and stop being imperialist, and become no more or no less than any country. He doesn't want the US to be a world policeman. He ran on ending the wars. The reason he won't fix ISIS is because he believes that would be imperialism.

Obama could have kept troops in Iraq for stability but he believes that would be imperialist. Come on MJ, his entire campaing revolved around getting out of the Middle East. He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.











Obama could have kept troops in Iraq for stability but he believes that would be imperialist. Come on MJ, his entire campaing revolved around getting out of the Middle East. He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.

No... U.S. Troops remaining in Iraq, would provide no lasting stability. The surge, which included bribing the Sunnis not to attack us, was getting old. Sunnis were still disaffected in a Shia-controlled government, and ripe for Al Qaeda, ISIS, or whomever, even MUCH MORE so as U.S. troops become a target. Our military is designed to fight wars, not to provide stability. Providing stability is a diplomatic and political mission. (Not a military one).

He doesn't believe we should be there and it would just be enslaving the the brown people through colonization if we stayed.
Interesting. And you know what he believes?

One other comment... I call B.S. on Obama, who now says he wanted to leave 10,000 troops in Iraq, but didn't ONLY because Bush signed an agreement to remove all forces. He CAMPAIGNED on removing troops from Iraq! He is getting a bit revisionist.

I know what he's stated he believes:

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem.html

quote:

What then is Obama’s dream? We don’t have to speculate because the President tells us himself in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father. According to Obama, his dream is his father’s dream. Notice that his title is not Dreams of My Father but rather Dreams from My Father. Obama isn’t writing about his father’s dreams; he is writing about the dreams he received from his father.



quote:

Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America. As one of Obama’s acknowledged intellectual influences, Frantz Fanon, wrote in The Wretched of the Earth, “The well-being and progress of Europe have been built up with the sweat and the dead bodies of Negroes, Arabs, Indians and the yellow races.”


quote:



It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That is what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America’s military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father’s position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America’s power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe’s resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.




HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 9:03:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Could have left a stabilizing force in Iraq.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/may/18/jeb-bush/obama-refused-sign-plan-place-leave-10000-troops-i/


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0



From your first link:

Obama inherited a timeline to exit Iraq from George W. Bush and followed it, but there was no agreement to leave a large force behind.

And the second link from the lefty NYT discusses that in detail. Everybody believed the negotiations were ongoing and what was publicly said was a typical Iraqis public comment until a final deal was hammered out.



The second link is exactly my understanding of the events. There were discussions about leaving troops. Some in the Iraqi government wanted U.S. troops. Maliki was reluctant, mainly because he didn't want to give them immunity.

If anything, THIS link refutes your claim, that Obama wanted to withdraw because he felt that would be imperialist.

I am not sure of what point you are trying to make with this??

You didn't read where all of his military advisors and Leon Paneta all assumed eventually it would happen and that Maliki was just posturing?




MasterJaguar01 -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 9:11:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Could have left a stabilizing force in Iraq.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/may/18/jeb-bush/obama-refused-sign-plan-place-leave-10000-troops-i/


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0



From your first link:

Obama inherited a timeline to exit Iraq from George W. Bush and followed it, but there was no agreement to leave a large force behind.

And the second link from the lefty NYT discusses that in detail. Everybody believed the negotiations were ongoing and what was publicly said was a typical Iraqis public comment until a final deal was hammered out.



The second link is exactly my understanding of the events. There were discussions about leaving troops. Some in the Iraqi government wanted U.S. troops. Maliki was reluctant, mainly because he didn't want to give them immunity.

If anything, THIS link refutes your claim, that Obama wanted to withdraw because he felt that would be imperialist.

I am not sure of what point you are trying to make with this??

You didn't read where all of his military advisors and Leon Paneta all assumed eventually it would happen and that Maliki was just posturing?


ok... So? AT the end of the day... The Obama administration was negotiating with the Iraqis to leave troops. It is irrelevant who assumed what. Someone negotiating to leave troops is not someone who believed we shouldn't be there because it would be imperialist. I think he was being misleading when he said the ONLY reason was Bush's timeline.

And, of course he doesn't address that he campaigned on leaving.

The link still refutes your own claim.




HunterCA -> RE: Stand back folks - Marxism at work (6/14/2015 9:15:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

Could have left a stabilizing force in Iraq.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/may/18/jeb-bush/obama-refused-sign-plan-place-leave-10000-troops-i/


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/middleeast/united-states-and-iraq-had-not-expected-troops-would-have-to-leave.html?_r=0



From your first link:

Obama inherited a timeline to exit Iraq from George W. Bush and followed it, but there was no agreement to leave a large force behind.

And the second link from the lefty NYT discusses that in detail. Everybody believed the negotiations were ongoing and what was publicly said was a typical Iraqis public comment until a final deal was hammered out.



The second link is exactly my understanding of the events. There were discussions about leaving troops. Some in the Iraqi government wanted U.S. troops. Maliki was reluctant, mainly because he didn't want to give them immunity.

If anything, THIS link refutes your claim, that Obama wanted to withdraw because he felt that would be imperialist.

I am not sure of what point you are trying to make with this??



Only when you want it to read a certain way.





quote:

And for the negotiators who labored all year to avoid that outcome, it represented the triumph of politics over the reality of Iraq’s fragile security’s requiring some troops to stay, a fact everyone had assumed would prevail. But officials also held out hope that after the withdrawal, the two countries could restart negotiations more productively, as two sovereign nations.



quote:

This year, American military officials had said they wanted a “residual” force of as many as tens of thousands of American troops to remain in Iraq past 2011 as an insurance policy against any violence. Those numbers were scaled back, but the expectation was that at least about 3,000 to 5,000 American troops would remain


quote:

At the end of the Bush administration, when the Status of Forces Agreement, or SOFA, was negotiated, setting 2011 as the end of the United States’ military role, officials had said the deadline was set for political reasons, to put a symbolic end to the occupation and establish Iraq’s sovereignty. But there was an understanding, a senior official here said, that a sizable American force would stay in Iraq beyond that date.



quote:

Acutely aware of that sentiment, the Iraqi leadership quickly said publicly that they would not support legal protections for any American troops. Some American officials have privately said that pushing for that meeting — in essence forcing the Iraqis to take a public stand on such a controversial matter before working out the politics of presenting it to their constituents and to Parliament — was a severe tactical mistake that ended any possibility of keeping American troops here past December.




Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.078125