quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

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.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

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.

quote:

These claims don’t jibe with what we know about how the negotiations with Iraq went. It’s the White House itself that decided just 2–3,000 troops made sense, when the Defense Department and others were proposing more. Maliki was willing to accept a deal with U.S. forces if it was worth it to him — the problem was that the Obama administration wanted a small force so that it could say it had ended the war. Having a very small American force wasn’t worth the domestic political price Maliki would have to pay for supporting their presence. In other words, it’s not correct that “the al-Maliki government wanted American troops to leave.” That contradicts the reporting that’s been done on the issue by well-known neocon propaganda factories The New Yorker and the New York Times. Prime Minister Maliki did say in public, at times, that he personally couldn’t offer the guarantees necessary to keep U.S. troops in the country, but it’s well-established that behind closed doors, he was interested in a substantial U.S. presence. The Obama administration, in fact, doesn’t even really deny it: For Dexter Filkins’s New Yorker story, deputy national-security adviser Ben Rhodes didn’t dispute this issue, he just argued that a U.S. troop presence wouldn’t have been a panacea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

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.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/380508/no-us-troops-didnt-have-leave-iraq-patrick-brennan

quote:

These claims don’t jibe with what we know about how the negotiations with Iraq went. It’s the White House itself that decided just 2–3,000 troops made sense, when the Defense Department and others were proposing more. Maliki was willing to accept a deal with U.S. forces if it was worth it to him — the problem was that the Obama administration wanted a small force so that it could say it had ended the war. Having a very small American force wasn’t worth the domestic political price Maliki would have to pay for supporting their presence. In other words, it’s not correct that “the al-Maliki government wanted American troops to leave.” That contradicts the reporting that’s been done on the issue by well-known neocon propaganda factories The New Yorker and the New York Times. Prime Minister Maliki did say in public, at times, that he personally couldn’t offer the guarantees necessary to keep U.S. troops in the country, but it’s well-established that behind closed doors, he was interested in a substantial U.S. presence. The Obama administration, in fact, doesn’t even really deny it: For Dexter Filkins’s New Yorker story, deputy national-security adviser Ben Rhodes didn’t dispute this issue, he just argued that a U.S. troop presence wouldn’t have been a panacea.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

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.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/380508/no-us-troops-didnt-have-leave-iraq-patrick-brennan

quote:

These claims don’t jibe with what we know about how the negotiations with Iraq went. It’s the White House itself that decided just 2–3,000 troops made sense, when the Defense Department and others were proposing more. Maliki was willing to accept a deal with U.S. forces if it was worth it to him — the problem was that the Obama administration wanted a small force so that it could say it had ended the war. Having a very small American force wasn’t worth the domestic political price Maliki would have to pay for supporting their presence. In other words, it’s not correct that “the al-Maliki government wanted American troops to leave.” That contradicts the reporting that’s been done on the issue by well-known neocon propaganda factories The New Yorker and the New York Times. Prime Minister Maliki did say in public, at times, that he personally couldn’t offer the guarantees necessary to keep U.S. troops in the country, but it’s well-established that behind closed doors, he was interested in a substantial U.S. presence. The Obama administration, in fact, doesn’t even really deny it: For Dexter Filkins’s New Yorker story, deputy national-security adviser Ben Rhodes didn’t dispute this issue, he just argued that a U.S. troop presence wouldn’t have been a panacea.

Great link! It provides detail on what I posted previously. You can be my research assistant.

This piece adds a lot of right-wing spin and conjecture, but it seems factually accurate. And it least it doesn't refute your own post like the earlier ones did. But, it does nothing to prove it, either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

I always wonder about that. Short for you but not wanting to edit others posts. Thanks for the guidance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

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.

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!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

I dont see how the cost of health care to an individual can be the same in France as it is in the US, given France spends half as much as a percentage of GDP. The US comes top of the spending list in any of the major charts one cares to look at.

Ha, life is full of mysteries. I note that you and crazyml have lots of charts and studies that doesn't seem to actually apply to my experience. Probably no wonder I don't want to change to your system.

Got any links to prove your point..... I can back up mine easily enough.

Let's take just a second and analyze just how stupid that statement is. I said you seem to have lots of charts and studies that don't apply to my experience. You asked me to provide links. To what PS. My experience? Or, your charts? Pay attention ol sod.

Lets not, because "your experience" is just a bullshit claim you could make up yourself. Like I said, healthcare costs per head in France are only half that of those in the US. If you expect me to somehow believe you have a unique case taken from two countries simultainiously, I am calling bullshit.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2014/06/16/u-s-healthcare-ranked-dead-last-compared-to-10-other-countries/

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

[/quote

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

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

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.

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)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

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.

So your point is, the autobiography he wrote in 1995 is evidence that he wanted to pull out of Iraq and not leave troops there, BECAUSE he felt it "colonial" to do so, and in spite of that desire, negotiated with the Iraqis to leave troops there anyway.


Sorry, if I don't buy it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


The thing I posted said that the French took 8% of their salary off the top for health care. I just took 8% of my salary and compared the dollar for dollar. It was the same. So maybe my salary is twice what they make in France if you say I'm paying double. That seems reasonable to me since it's well known that workers in socialist systems aren't as productive.

quote:

Your post #105
Oh ya...you've been a big help. Your stated facts are wrong, but you've shown an interest in defending them. I'd guess just because an employer paid, pretax dollars, health care plan that is fantastic implies the taxes you pay don't ewual that. I can look it up again and, but I posted a link about France this morning where they paid, if I remember correctly, 8% of their salary, obviously not pretax dollars, for health care which covered 70% of their expenses. The rest was out of pocket. At my employ, I pay half that, just my personal experience, and my last operation, docs, hospital, meds, cost me $300 out of pocket.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


The thing I posted said that the French took 8% of their salary off the top for health care. I just took 8% of my salary and compared the dollar for dollar. It was the same. So maybe my salary is twice what they make in France if you say I'm paying double. That seems reasonable to me since it's well known that workers in socialist systems aren't as productive.

I said the percentage of GDP was double...... You also said earlier you paid half of the figure the French pay. 8% is still 8% whatever currency you use.

quote:

Your post #105
Oh ya...you've been a big help. Your stated facts are wrong, but you've shown an interest in defending them. I'd guess just because an employer paid, pretax dollars, health care plan that is fantastic implies the taxes you pay don't ewual that. I can look it up again and, but I posted a link about France this morning where they paid, if I remember correctly, 8% of their salary, obviously not pretax dollars, for health care which covered 70% of their expenses. The rest was out of pocket. At my employ, I pay half that, just my personal experience, and my last operation, docs, hospital, meds, cost me $300 out of pocket.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
You're getting confused. There are two things. In this you asked me how I knew what he believed. This is a reasonable response to that question. How do I know what he did, is responded to later. You need to keep the two straight.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

I will take your word for it. I am not an expert on what people think and feel. I can tell you that I have not seen it.