“Non-revolutionary socialists took inspiration from the work of John Stuart Mill, and later Keynes and the Keynesians, who provided theoretical justification for (potentially very extensive) state involvement in an existing market economy.”
[/quote]
“Took inspiration from” is a pretty weak descriptor here. I’ve taken inspiration from Christianity from time to time, doesn’t mean I’ll be celebrating the birth of my Lord and Savior a month from now.
Keynesians believe that government is forced to use monetary policy in order to right systemic wrongs in the free market from time to time–e.g., using public money to stimulate a rise in employment during economic malaise. George W. Bush’s response to the 2007-8 financial crisis was essentially Keynesian, but I don’t see you or anyone else accusing W. of harboring furtive Soviet sympathies. And that’s because “The General Theory…” is not The Communist Manifesto and a Keynesian is not ipso facto a socialist.
Francois Hollande is fighting for a 75 percent income tax on top earners in France. He’s a socialist. Obama looks likely to push for a three percentage point uptick on top earners, returning the American super-rich to their Clinton-era tax rate. Not a socialist.
You can, as Push is above, lose sleep over what the guy wants in his “heart of hearts,” based upon associations from his distant past. I’d rather worry about realities in 2012.
…I’ve made my points in this thread. They haven’t been refuted…
[/quote]
I genuinely LOL’ed.[/quote]
Please point out where I was refuted, for extra credit please point out where you attempted and were actually successful. Beans made some good points and if I knew how to multi-quote them on this forum, I’d respond, but the discussion moved past that after I read it.
YOU certainly haven’t came close. [/quote]
OK, if you don’t mind please summarize the points you’ve made about how some Russians, specifically Pravda - traditional voice of the Russian Communist Party - view Obama.
Just a little ol’ bullet point synopsis.[/quote]
You claimed this was irrefutable evidence of Obama being a Communist. I pointed out these were CLEARLY the words of someone highly biased (you can tell from his prose), and other people pointed out how this was hardly news of the whole. You can ignore that all you want. It’s worked for you so far.
I’ve made my points in this thread. They haven’t been refuted. [/quote]
You said Obama is not a socialist, despite the fact that he was a member of a socialist party and was elected to the Illinois Senate on a socialist party ticket. You then suggest that people who think he is a socialist are insane. Let me explain something to you my little dumpling. Socialist may be a dirty word in the US of A, but in the rest of the world everyone from former British Prime Minister Lloyd George to the current French President self-identify as socialists. It’s not an uncommon phenomena to be a socialist and recognising them is not a sign of insanity.[/quote]
Of what party is Barack Obama a member of? Is it the socialist party? If that is your ACE in the hole, then please point out what party Barack Obama won the nomination for President and what party he is currently under. Please tell me under what party did Barack Obama win the Illinois Senate seat under. What letter was beside his name on the ballot. His landslide victory led to quick ascension in WHAT FUCKING PARTY’S RANKS? You can talk that “new party” shit all day long and blah blah blah sought endorsement. Makes no difference to me. Obama has NEVER WON AN ELECTION FOR SENATE AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN A DEMOCRAT.
Good God I’m going back to Lizard King, you people are fucking insane. Caps used so you can see how stupid you are.
[/quote]
I think SexMachine touched a nerve here.
But what he says about Socialist recognition in other countries is true. Shit, Italy had a fucking parade when Bam got reelected. Why ? Because (get this, because it priceless) they think Bam is going to help their (Italy’s) economy too. A similar sentiment was shared in 2008 as well, I was in Paris when Bam was elected, and people there cheered their asses off then too.
Bam being reelected and praised by those going bankrupt is something that should concern you. If you think I am kidding, I have seen RAI news (Italian news channel) with unemployment statistics of 30% in some places. This is not partisan bullshit, it’s just arithmetic. Hopefully Bam’s idea of arithmetic is better than Clinton’s definition of sexual relations.
Of what party is Barack Obama a member of? Is it the socialist party?
[/quote]
Currently? The Democratic Party. Although it’s not really the same Democratic Party that it used to be is it? It’s been infiltrated by socialists. That’s what Frank Marshall Davis’ 600 page FBI file revealed: his plans to infiltrate the Democratic Party.
Didn’t we just do this?
It was a split ticket. He ran as a member of the Socialist New Party and as a Democrat via a process called voter fusion. Voter fusion was a tactic of the hard left designed to fulfill Frank Marshall Davis’ plan of infiltrating the Democratic Party as his 600 page FBI file reveals.
I don’t see the relevance. As I said, he ran on a split ticket as a member of both parties.
In the US Senate no, however in the Illinois state Senate he ran on a split socialist party/Democrat ticket. What does the fact that he’s a member of the Democratic Party have to do with anything? There are more than a hundred Democratic Congressmen and women who are also members of the Democratic Socialists of America:
Are you suggesting that Obama can’t be a socialist because he’s a member of the Democratic Party? I don’t understand what you’re trying to say. Please explain yourself.
So your argument is that Obama can’t be a socialist because he’s a member of the Democratic Party even though there are more than a hundred other socialists in Congress who are members of the Democratic Party? And I’m the one who’s stupid? What are talking about goofball? Why can’t Obama be a socialist and a member of the Democratic Party? Explain.
Of what party is Barack Obama a member of? Is it the socialist party? If that is your ACE in the hole, then please point out what party Barack Obama won the nomination for President and what party he is currently under. Please tell me under what party did Barack Obama win the Illinois Senate seat under. What letter was beside his name on the ballot. His landslide victory led to quick ascension in WHAT FUCKING PARTY’S RANKS? You can talk that “new party” shit all day long and blah blah blah sought endorsement. Makes no difference to me. Obama has NEVER WON AN ELECTION FOR SENATE AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN A DEMOCRAT.
[/quote]
As much as anything, that says a whole lot about the modern Democratic Party AND socialism, doesn’t it?
Just embrace it, be proud and quit running like a scalded cat from the socialist label. Why is it such a problem for you fellers hoist your true colors up the mast? Do you think you need to fly a different flag in order to sneak up on your prey? Are you really pirates of the Main? Where is your dignity? Where is your honor? Wassup?
Good God I’m going back to Lizard King, you people are fucking insane. Caps used so you can see how stupid you are.
[/quote]
[/quote]
This is rational thought and discourse? THAT’S your response? It’s been well established I’m a Libertarian, but you do the Republican Party a HUGE disservice by going into the conspiracy theory game. It’s why some many people are running away from you guys in droves. You want to blame it on so many things so badly, but really people are AFRAID of you guys. The things you believe aren’t based in logic. They don’t pass the smell test.
Lol Obama GIFT HANDED you guys this election and you still managed to blow it. People are privy to your horseshit. They know you don’t have a leg to stand on in fiscal responsibility because the people YOU’VE elected have expanded government greatly. They HATE your back asswards social views from the 1950’s. You have beautiful Senate seats GIFT WRAPPED for you and you continuously fuck it up by nominating people who are insane enough to think like some of the people on here. And you desperately search around for articles and links for the confirmation bias of a worldview you REALLY REALLY WANT TO BELIEVE. And you can find it. You can find TONS of stuff on the moon landing being faked. And maybe this helps you sleep at night. If only EVERYONE else knew what you select few did. It’s not your fault Obama won…it’s the people who DON’T SEE IT.
You want to know why Romney lost? Look square in the mirror. People like you and so many other FAR righties on here. This is a nice little nest for some of you and your confirmation biases and I’m sorry I disturbed it. It really sucks for some of this to be thrown in your faces so plainly.
Sex: You got it man. You’re SO far gone, you’re not worth bothering with. Obama’s a Communist. He’s a Socialist. He’s whatever you say he is. You won’t change no matter what anyone says to you. You’ve got your handy dandy far right links to feed you what you want to believe and no manner of “he has only won as a Democrat is going to change you.”
It didn’t say Socialist Party on the Ballot. It had a D by it for Democrat. Just like the Presidency when I voted Gary Johnson…I saw his name it also had a D. You can think whatever you want. You’re WAY past arguing rationally and I’m not even going to attempt to on this point. I’m sure in your 600 page FBI report you’ve got it all figured out already anyways. You win man. I can’t even begin to think of where I would start to attempt to change what you’re convinced is 100% truth. All I was trying to point out was he has never ran publicly as anything other than a Democrat. This is 100% undeniable fact, but you’re trying to get around it because you have far right links that talk about split tickets. Ok man, whatever you say.
“Took inspiration from” is a pretty weak descriptor here. I’ve taken inspiration from Christianity from time to time, doesn’t mean I’ll be celebrating the birth of my Lord and Savior a month from now.
[/quote]
Keynes was a Fabian through and through. He was also a sexual deviant.
'Lytton Strachey, his male bed partner, wrote that Keynes was “A liberal and a sodomite, An atheist and a statistician.” Keynes and his friends made numerous trips to the resorts surrounding the Mediterranean. At the resorts, little boys were sold by their families to bordellos which catered to homosexuals.
In 2008, The Atlantic reported:
Keynes lists his sexual partners, either by their initials (GLS for Lytton Strachey, DG for Duncan Grant) or their nicknames (“Tressider,” for J. T. Sheppard, the King’s College Provost). When he apparently had a quick, anonymous hook-up, he listed that sex partner generically: “16-year-old under Etna” and “Lift boy of Vauxhall” in 1911, for instance, and “Jew boy,” in 1912.
Zygmund Dobbs wrote in his work Keynes at Harvard:
In 1967 the world was startled by the publication of the letters between Lytton Strachey and Maynard Keynes. Undisputed evidence in their private correspondence shows that Keynes was a life-long sexual deviate. What was more shocking was that these practices extended to a large group. Homosexuality, sado-masochism, lesbianism, and the deliberate policy of corrupting the young was the established practice of this large and influential group…
Keynes’ sexual partner, Lytton Strachey, indicated that their sexual attitudes could be infiltrated, “subtly, through literature, into the bloodstream of the people, and in such a way that they accepted it all quite naturally, if need be, without at first realizing what it was to which they were agreeing.” He further explained, privately, that, “he sought to write in a way that would contribute to an eventual change in our ethical and sexual moresâ??a change that couldn’t ‘be done in a minute,’ but would unobtrusively permeate the more flexible minds of young people.” This is a classic expression of the Fabian socialist method of seducing the mind. This was written in 1929 when it was already in practice for over forty years. It is no wonder we are reaping the whirlwind of student disorders where drug addiction and homosexuality rule the day.’
All socialists are Keynesians but not all Keynesians are socialists?
If you earn more than 250k you’re “super-rich?”
[quote]
You can, as Push is above, lose sleep over what the guy wants in his “heart of hearts,” based upon associations from his distant past. I’d rather worry about realities in 2012.[/quote]
There you go again. I just posted a list of people in his administration he appointed who are Communists, socialists and radical leftists. Obama associates with and appoints radical leftists now. Not in the “distant past.”
Sport, you are right about one thing here. Romney DID lose on account of guys like me because I did not vote for him.
I voted for Gary Johnson.
I also voted for several Libertarians for various state offices. I voted GOP for a few others, namely the US Senate and governor.
So you might just wanna check hysterical reactions at the front door or…I WILL SCREAM AT YOU LIKE YOU DO TO EVERYONE ELSE HERE.
I know one thing…you give me pause in my hope for the Libertarian Party. I like many of their ideas and policies but the fact that they attract screaming, left wing lunatics like you causes me to have a nervous twitch.[/quote]
I mainly scream to mouth breathing morons who attempt to convince me the President of the United States is indeed a Lizard King. I could have sworn you were probably a true blooded die hard Republican like so many on this board, apologizing for everything they do and losing your bloody mind when the other side does the same thing.
That said, I MAY come off as left on THIS site because that’s what this site requires. Logical thinking and reason should be championed as the true voices of argument and indeed political thought. Hypocrisies of both sides should be loudly pointed out as such. It’s the only way to get people to open their eyes. It rarely works with the true die hard believers, ones who think the ramblings of a Russian paper opinion piece is indisputable evidence the President is a full bloodied Commie, when so much other evidence proves otherwise. Like the fact he has the most powerful job in the world and has yet to turn this country into anything looking like a Communist one.
Make no mistake about it, I’m not left in the least bit. I’ll call out the left’s hypocrisy and ludicrous thinking all night long. I do this on another site all the time. They absolutely despise me there. It just isn’t found anywhere on this site. The rights is and it is in SPADES. It deserves to be called out. This is the only way to get someone to open their eyes. Again the chance is slim, but it does exist. Reason and rational thought is the only way to do this. And if I’m posting it will be what I do.
It’s my thinking that the two parties are damn near the exact same on all the stuff that really matters. I think Obama and GWB are PERFECT examples of this. Reagan is as well…you just have to dispel all his magic myths. The sooner people quit drinking the mainstream party koolaid the better. The parties do have their differences, but they are quite small and largely in minor details. Both aim to control you in different ways. Both want huge government just in slightly different manners. Neither has the solution to our problems.
[quote]H factor wrote:
Sex: You got it man. You’re SO far gone, you’re not worth bothering with. Obama’s a Communist. He’s a Socialist. He’s whatever you say he is. You won’t change no matter what anyone says to you. You’ve got your handy dandy far right links to feed you what you want to believe and no manner of “he has only won as a Democrat is going to change you.”
[/quote]
Wikipedia is a “far right link?”
We’re going around in circles again. I specifically asked you what that has to do with anything.
Well actually he ran on a split ticket as I said. However, if what you’re saying is true then that’s even worse isn’t it? The fact that he’s a socialist yet hid that fact from voters. I still don’t see what you’re trying to say.
[quote]
This is 100% undeniable fact, but you’re trying to get around it because you have far right links that talk about split tickets. Ok man, whatever you say. [/quote]
See the picture attached from the New Party News. You’re really denying that Obama was a member of the New Party and ran on a split ticket?
From Forbes Magazine:
“President Obama did, in fact, formally join the far-leftist New Party and sign its candidate contract.”
“Took inspiration from” is a pretty weak descriptor here. I’ve taken inspiration from Christianity from time to time, doesn’t mean I’ll be celebrating the birth of my Lord and Savior a month from now.
[quote]
Keynes was a Fabian through and through. He was also a sexual deviant.
'Lytton Strachey, his male bed partner, wrote that Keynes was “A liberal and a sodomite, An atheist and a statistician.” Keynes and his friends made numerous trips to the resorts surrounding the Mediterranean. At the resorts, little boys were sold by their families to bordellos which catered to homosexuals.
In 2008, The Atlantic reported:
Keynes lists his sexual partners, either by their initials (GLS for Lytton Strachey, DG for Duncan Grant) or their nicknames (“Tressider,” for J. T. Sheppard, the King’s College Provost). When he apparently had a quick, anonymous hook-up, he listed that sex partner generically: “16-year-old under Etna” and “Lift boy of Vauxhall” in 1911, for instance, and “Jew boy,” in 1912.
Zygmund Dobbs wrote in his work Keynes at Harvard:
In 1967 the world was startled by the publication of the letters between Lytton Strachey and Maynard Keynes. Undisputed evidence in their private correspondence shows that Keynes was a life-long sexual deviate. What was more shocking was that these practices extended to a large group. Homosexuality, sado-masochism, lesbianism, and the deliberate policy of corrupting the young was the established practice of this large and influential group…
Keynes’ sexual partner, Lytton Strachey, indicated that their sexual attitudes could be infiltrated, “subtly, through literature, into the bloodstream of the people, and in such a way that they accepted it all quite naturally, if need be, without at first realizing what it was to which they were agreeing.” He further explained, privately, that, “he sought to write in a way that would contribute to an eventual change in our ethical and sexual moresâ??a change that couldn’t ‘be done in a minute,’ but would unobtrusively permeate the more flexible minds of young people.” This is a classic expression of the Fabian socialist method of seducing the mind. This was written in 1929 when it was already in practice for over forty years. It is no wonder we are reaping the whirlwind of student disorders where drug addiction and homosexuality rule the day.’
All socialists are Keynesians but not all Keynesians are socialists?
If you earn more than 250k you’re “super-rich?”
[quote]
You can, as Push is above, lose sleep over what the guy wants in his “heart of hearts,” based upon associations from his distant past. I’d rather worry about realities in 2012.[/quote]
There you go again. I just posted a list of people in his administration he appointed who are Communists, socialists and radical leftists. Obama associates with and appoints radical leftists now. Not in the “distant past.”[/quote]
Keynes’ sexual preferences have no bearing here.
You didn’t list Communists and radicals, you listed a couple of Keynesians-- a term which, by the way, you haven’t proved to be synonymous with socialists. And you haven’t even tried to refute my definition of Keynesianism or to show why that definition is correct and somehow necessarily associated with state ownership of the means of production. And you haven’t addressed the absolutely indisputable fact that many of the Presidents economic advisers–and certainlymany of his high-level appointments–have been traditional establishment capitalists, the same kind and indeed in some cases the same exact ones that G.W. Bush tended to favor.
More simply (and because it seems that you think he deserves not only to be called a socialist but also a Red): Communists abolish private property. Has Barack Obama abolished private property? Has he tried to?
You didn’t list Communists and radicals, you listed a couple of Keynesians–
[/quote]
No I’m talking about the list before that: Axelrod, Van Jones, Valerie Jarrett etc. You know, before you told me I’m only allowed to list economists.
I shouldn’t need to show Keynesian economics are synonymous with socialist economics as just about every socialist on the planet endorses his theories. This is what Keynes wrote in the 1936 German version of his work:
“The theory of aggregate production, which is the point of the following book, nevertheless can be much easier adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state than the theory of production and distribution of a given production put forth under conditions of free competition and a large degree of laissez-faire.”
Firstly, I agree with your definition. It’s not mutually exclusive with anything that I’ve said.
“I conceive, therefore, that a somewhat comprehensive socialisation of investment will prove the only means of securing an approximation to full employment.” - Keynes
Actually I showed them to be Keynesians and capitalist cronies which I explained are rife in socialist regimes and pointed to China as an example.
[quote]
More simply (and because it seems that you think he deserves not only to be called a socialist but also a Red): Communists abolish private property. Has Barack Obama abolished private property? Has he tried to?[/quote]
Has China? Has Hugo Chavez? Poor argument. You’re really just playing a semantic game and avoiding the indisputable fact that Obama is a radical leftist. His voting record showed him to be the most left-wing Senator in the entire Senate. Who cares what you call him? He’s an asshole.
[quote]H factor wrote:
Sex: You got it man. You’re SO far gone, you’re not worth bothering with. Obama’s a Communist. He’s a Socialist. He’s whatever you say he is. You won’t change no matter what anyone says to you. You’ve got your handy dandy far right links to feed you what you want to believe and no manner of “he has only won as a Democrat is going to change you.”
[/quote]
Wikipedia is a “far right link?”
We’re going around in circles again. I specifically asked you what that has to do with anything.
Well actually he ran on a split ticket as I said. However, if what you’re saying is true then that’s even worse isn’t it? The fact that he’s a socialist yet hid that fact from voters. I still don’t see what you’re trying to say.
[quote]
This is 100% undeniable fact, but you’re trying to get around it because you have far right links that talk about split tickets. Ok man, whatever you say. [/quote]
See the picture attached from the New Party News. You’re really denying that Obama was a member of the New Party and ran on a split ticket?
From Forbes Magazine:
“President Obama did, in fact, formally join the far-leftist New Party and sign its candidate contract.”[/quote]
Before you EVEN posted the new party I already said blah blah blah New Party. Yeah, I’ve seen that link long ago. I don’t really know what you’re expecting here. Obama has NEVER RAN AS A SOCIALIST. You can tout that split ticket stuff all night long. He’s always ran for public office as a Democrat. This is undeniable fact. Almost all politicians have shady ties, and you can point to a ton of people on the left and right who this is true for. Heck I supported Ron Paul because I loved his ideas and he has a history of holy shit ties. You have to pander to the wackos to ever win a state race anyways. Read your link man, the New Party endorsed him. Need I bring up the KKK endorsing some righties? How about the John Birch Society? That one a little more comfortable?
Again, if Barack Obama is indeed Communist or Socialist or whatever you say he definitely is (even though he’s NEVER ran as one), he’s SHITTY AS HELL AT IT. Fuck he used Bob Dole and Mitt Romney’s health plan. He kept the Bush tax cuts when he got in office. He has bombed the shit out of everyone to high heaven (which infuriates me, but gets the rights rocks off), he has continued the war on drugs, he has allowed for more offshore drilling.
Maybe you’re right and deep down in his heart of hearts and soul of souls Barack Obama is the biggest Socialist in the history of the world. But he’s DAMN BAD AT SHOWING it. If I was a Socialist I’d be pissed as hell someone who we finally got in office was doing such a crap job of enacting what we want.
I’m not a “rightie” I’m a conservative. I don’t know of any conservative who was a member of the KKK. Plenty of Democrats were however.
Not sure what any of that has to do with anything. In China you get the death penalty for drug offences that are considered minor in the west. The Vietcong, Stalin and plenty of other Commies bombed the shit out of people and China and Venezuella are drilling like there’s no tomorrow.
[quote]
Maybe you’re right and deep down in his heart of hearts and soul of souls Barack Obama is the biggest Socialist in the history of the world. But he’s DAMN BAD AT SHOWING it. If I was a Socialist I’d be pissed as hell someone who we finally got in office was doing such a crap job of enacting what we want. [/quote]
Funny that CPUSA and every socialist on the planet including Hugo Chavez and Castro’s daughter officially and publically endorse Barack Obama then isn’t it? I think you’re confused.
I’m not a “rightie” I’m a conservative. I don’t know of any conservative who was a member of the KKK. Plenty of Democrats were however.
Not sure what any of that has to do with anything. In China you get the death penalty for drug offences that are considered minor in the west. The Vietcong, Stalin and plenty of other Commies bombed the shit out of people and China and Venezuella are drilling like there’s no tomorrow.
[quote]
Maybe you’re right and deep down in his heart of hearts and soul of souls Barack Obama is the biggest Socialist in the history of the world. But he’s DAMN BAD AT SHOWING it. If I was a Socialist I’d be pissed as hell someone who we finally got in office was doing such a crap job of enacting what we want. [/quote]
Funny that CPUSA and every socialist on the planet including Hugo Chavez and Castro’s daughter officially and publically endorse Barack Obama then isn’t it? I think you’re confused.[/quote]
I don’t really see what you’re driving at. Mitt Romney had an asston of endorsements from crazy people as did John McCain. Same is true of Barack Obama. You seem to want to make that matter a whole hell of a lot more than what someone does while in office.
Although I must admit your logical gigantic leaps to paint any action of his as Communist has been quite impressive to behold. “Hell the Russians had cars…Obama has cars…Commie!”
