Let's stop calling Democrats liberals

[avatar4321]

Let's just call them who they really are: Socialists/communists.

[retiredman]

can you provide me any links to any democrats advocating that the vanguard of the proletariat overthrow the capitalist goverment and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat?

can you provide me any links to any democrats advocating government owneship of all the means of production and distribution?

I seemed to have missed those, or are you just tossing our communism and socialism as epithets without understanding their meaning?

[Dilloduck]

can you provide me any links to any democrats advocating that the vanguard of the proletariat overthrow the capitalist goverment and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat?

can you provide me any links to any democrats advocating government owneship of all the means of production and distribution?

I seemed to have missed those, or are you just tossing our communism and socialism as epithets without understanding their meaning?

They don't want ownership---just control. :laugh2:

[retiredman]

They don't want ownership---just control. :laugh2:

then that is not socialism....it's politics.

kinda like how republicans want control of what goes on in a woman's uterus... politics.

[avatar4321]

can you provide me any links to any democrats advocating that the vanguard of the proletariat overthrow the capitalist goverment and establish a dictatorship of the proletariat?

can you provide me any links to any democrats advocating government owneship of all the means of production and distribution?

I seemed to have missed those, or are you just tossing our communism and socialism as epithets without understanding their meaning?

just read the DNC platform. it's all there.

[Dilloduck]

then that is not socialism....it's politics.

kinda like how republicans want control of what goes on in a woman's uterus... politics.

exactly--democrats are the political wing of socialism.

[retiredman]

exactly--democrats are the political wing of socialism.

if you insist on misusing the word, we'll have nothing to talk about here.

[retiredman]

just read the DNC platform. it's all there.

the DNC platform calls for a dictatorship of the proletariat and government ownership of all of the means of production and distribution? I would disagree. Let's tone down the flatulent rhetoric, please.

[manu1959]

then that is not socialism....it's politics.

kinda like how republicans want control of what goes on in a woman's uterus... politics.

don't dems want the same control of that uterus....

[tlfb]

It's mine and I don't think anyone but me should decide what should happen with it. S:fu:tay out of it

[Dilloduck]

if you insist on misusing the word, we'll have nothing to talk about here.

Odd how the "great socialists" of the world support the democratic party don't you think ? Don't play terminology with us when you can't even admit to the socialist leanings of the Democrats.

[retiredman]

don't dems want the same control of that uterus....


not at all... we want a woman to be free to make that choice herself...with no one but her and her doctor involved.

[retiredman]

Odd how the "great socialists" of the world support the democratic party don't you think ? Don't play terminology with us when you can't even admit to the socialist leanings of the Democrats.

Use words correctly, or not at all. "Socialist leanings" is a riduculous statement. YOU have socialist leanings...most all of us do. Are you suggesting that every municipality in America that has government owned water systems or government own trash collection systems are socialist - or are they all just "leaning" that way?

[Abbey Marie]

don't dems want the same control of that uterus....

They just want control of the "products of conception", as they euphemistically call the fetus.

[Dilloduck]

Use words correctly, or not at all. "Socialist leanings" is a riduculous statement. YOU have socialist leanings...most all of us do. Are you suggesting that every municipality in America that has government owned water systems or government own trash collection systems are socialist - or are they all just "leaning" that way?

What is "riduculous" about socialist leanings ?

[retiredman]

What is "riduculous" about socialist leanings ?

everyone has them.

it's kinda like "pregnancy leaning". Either you are or you aren't.

Socialism is a system where the government owns all the means of production and distribution. Every government since the dawn of time has owned some services and systems.... everyone is leaning toward socialism, therefore, but no one gets there until government owns everything.


why did you fail to answer my question about American municipalities?

[Dilloduck]

Use words correctly, or not at all. "Socialist leanings" is a riduculous statement. YOU have socialist leanings...most all of us do. Are you suggesting that every municipality in America that has government owned water systems or government own trash collection systems are socialist - or are they all just "leaning" that way?

And yes---government owned systems are indeed socialist and hopefully they will privatized. They won't be if the democrats dont keep leaning towards controlling everything like health care.

[retiredman]

And yes---government owned systems are indeed socialist and hopefully they will privatized. They won't be if the democrats dont keep leaning towards controlling everything like health care.

so... every municipality in America is leaning toward socialism? then why castigate democrats for doing something as american as apple pie?
oh...and health care is not "everything".

[Dilloduck]

so... every municipality in America is leaning toward socialism? then why castigate democrats for doing something as american as apple pie?
oh...and health care is not "everything".

no---it's part of the process. The process of turning America socialist. It doesn't have to happen all at once, you know.

[retiredman]

no---it's part of the process. The process of turning America socialist. It doesn't have to happen all at once, you know.

so do you think that the democrats are the only party that has instituted government control of services and processes?

[Dilloduck]

so do you think that the democrats are the only party that has instituted government control of services and processes?

not at all---they're just more blatant about it. It's a direction they think is positive so they LEAN that way to persuade others to follow thereby creating a huge nanny state. Now that Soros is buying McCain too some RINOs will be drug out of the closet too.

[manu1959]

not at all... we want a woman to be free to make that choice herself...with no one but her and her doctor involved.

seems odd you all wouldn't want to regulate the uterus......you want everything else regulated and pretty much don't trust any individual to make a decision.....

[manu1959]

It's mine and I don't think anyone but me should decide what should happen with it. S:fu:tay out of it

if it is yours to decide with then don't make me support you or pay for your decissions......

[avatar4321]

the DNC platform calls for a dictatorship of the proletariat and government ownership of all of the means of production and distribution? I would disagree. Let's tone down the flatulent rhetoric, please.

simply because they are doing it in stages doesnt mean they arent doing it. What do you think "universal healthcare" is?

[retiredman]

simply because they are doing it in stages doesnt mean they arent doing it. What do you think "universal healthcare" is?

it is not socialism and it is not communism.

what do YOU think municipal water works are?

[retiredman]

seems odd you all wouldn't want to regulate the uterus......you want everything else regulated and pretty much don't trust any individual to make a decision.....

and you want to tell grown up adults its illegal to fuck other grown up adults in the privacy of their own bedrooms.

[manu1959]

it is not socialism and it is not communism.

what do YOU think municipal water works are?

all utilities are "state owned" and regulated.....ever wonder if they would work better if they were private.......

[Dilloduck]

it is not socialism and it is not communism.

what do YOU think municipal water works are?

Universal Health care IS socializing health care-----what dream world do you live in?

[manu1959]

and you want to tell grown up adults its illegal to fuck other grown up adults in the privacy of their own bedrooms.

i don't believe that the federal or state governments belong in the sex...marriage or divorce business.....you can marry a dog and have sex with it for all i care....

[manu1959]

Universal Health care IS socializing health care-----what dream world do you live in?

depends how you do it actually....if the indivudal buys and it is simply set up as a mass employee group set up by the state govt....rather than the state buys it and gives it to you and taxes pay for it....like that great retirement system social security.....

[retiredman]

i don't believe that the federal or state governments belong in the sex...marriage or divorce business.....you can marry a dog and have sex with it for all i care....

tell that to the bush administration.

[Dilloduck]

depends how you do it actually....if the indivudal buys and it is simply set up as a mass employee group set up by the state govt....rather than the state buys it and gives it to you and taxes pay for it....like that great retirement system social security.....

and if the individual is FORCED to buy it ?

[manu1959]

tell that to the bush administration.

i have....you tell it to o'hillary for me...would ya...

[retiredman]

i have....you tell it to o'hillary for me...would ya...

I will!

[diuretic]

Let's just call them who they really are: Socialists/communists.

From where I stand they're right wing capitalist running dogs :laugh2:

[retiredman]

Universal Health care IS socializing health care-----what dream world do you live in?


socialized is not socialism. that's fact.

like I said.... public water supplies are socialized....why don't republicans bitch about them?

[diuretic]

all utilities are "state owned" and regulated.....ever wonder if they would work better if they were private.......

The experience where I am on utilities is mixed. Water - a huge political issue here because of drought - is more expensive now but to be fair I think the various companies and authorities that are running it (under fairly close supervision by the state government) are doing pretty well, especially in the R & D area, so on balance I think I can say it worked.

Electricity though, different story. Price went through the roof and there's a need for major infrastructure improvement but each sector (including government) is trying to make the other pay for it. In the end the consumer will pay of course.

Anyway, just my own experiences, as I say, mixed.

[retiredman]

all utilities are "state owned" and regulated.....ever wonder if they would work better if they were private.......


having just retired from stockholder owned, publicly traded gas and electric utility, I would beg to differ.

[Dilloduck]

having just retired from stockholder owned, publicly traded gas and electric utility, I would beg to differ.

and it wasn't state regulated ? You're sucking wind on this socialism discussion bro---better start reading.

[retiredman]

and it wasn't state regulated ? Your sucking wind on this socialism discussion bro---better start reading.

of course it was state regulated - but it wasn't state owned and that is what he said. I differed with that. was I wrong? Was the company I worked for NOT traded on the NYSE?

and government regulation is not a bad thing... the deregulation of the electricity supply market caused such wonderful developments as ENRON....

and bottom line: you misuse the word socialism. fact. Everybody supports - tacitly or otherwise - some level of government control or regulation of some parts of society and life... that does not make everyone a socialist. Wanting to bring healthcare to people who don't have any does not make democrats socialists or communists.

those words are just flatulent rhetoric. period.

[PostmodernProphet]

It's mine and I don't think anyone but me should decide what should happen with it. Stay out of it

that's true up until YOU put someone else into it.....then that someone else has some rights as well......like the right to stay alive.....

[JohnDoe]

all utilities are "state owned" and regulated.....ever wonder if they would work better if they were private.......
That's not true. States/ towns have been selling off their utilities for more than a decade now...

my town in massachusetts sold off it's town water to a private British company...our water was owned by the Brits, and quite frankly it sucked, big time.... it had a high ecoli level in the water, for 7 years in a row and they still hadn't fixed the problem by the time we had left, they didn't give two shits about us the customer, and we couldn't do a thing....no other water companies around to switch to.... if it were the town, we could have all had a town meeting or refused to pay taxes... our water bill trippled in cost in three years time too...

Be happy if your water is still public.

I believe Massachusetts sold off their electric in my region right before we moved here to maine....where i have NONE of those amenities and have to fend for myself!!! my own septic, my own well, my own electric run to my house from the road paid for by moi.... absolutely nothing is "public" in my nowhere land town, but the beach is a mile and a half drive from my cottage, so i can't knock it!!!
jd

[Roadhouse158]

Not believing in Gay marriage isn't making it illegal for people to have sex in their bedrooms. Lets not dramatize the situation. This is the conception that people have about those against same sex marriage.They are trying to make it where they can't get married. Also, when someone mentioned they didn't believe the Federal, or State should be involved in marriage, a response was "tell that to the Bush Administration." President Bill Clinton signed the Marriage Defense Act. Not George W. Bush. Yes he's against it, but he didn't have to sign the bill. That was accomplished in the 90's.

[retiredman]

Not believing in Gay marriage isn't making it illegal for people to have sex in their bedrooms. Lets not dramatize the situation. This is the conception that people have about those against same sex marriage.They are trying to make it where they can't get married. Also, when someone mentioned they didn't believe the Federal, or State should be involved in marriage, a response was "tell that to the Bush Administration." President Bill Clinton signed the Marriage Defense Act. Not George W. Bush. Yes he's against it, but he didn't have to sign the bill. That was accomplished in the 90's.

Go look at Lawrence v. Texas

then tell me I am dramatizing anything.

[Roadhouse158]

Go look at Lawrence v. Texas

then tell me I am dramatizing anything.

OK...I did...
Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003),[1] was a landmark United States Supreme Court case. In the 6-3 ruling, the justices struck down the sodomy law that had criminalized homosexual sex in Texas. The court had previously addressed the same issue in 1986 in Bowers v. Hardwick, where it upheld a challenged Georgia statute, not finding a constitutional protection of sexual privacy.

This case was argued in 2003. It was ruled that there is a constitutional protection for sexual privacy. I will agree that there are some people who would want it illegal. This proves it, but it also proves that the majority of justice's, and in my experience, the majority of people who are against gay marriage don't really care if people are gay. Marriage however, is a different story.

[Dilloduck]

of course it was state regulated - but it wasn't state owned and that is what he said. I differed with that. was I wrong? Was the company I worked for NOT traded on the NYSE?

and government regulation is not a bad thing... the deregulation of the electricity supply market caused such wonderful developments as ENRON....

and bottom line: you misuse the word socialism. fact. Everybody supports - tacitly or otherwise - some level of government control or regulation of some parts of society and life... that does not make everyone a socialist. Wanting to bring healthcare to people who don't have any does not make democrats socialists or communists.

those words are just flatulent rhetoric. period.

Everyone already has access to health care and will continue to get it until Americans can stomach watching someone die on the side of the road.

[JohnDoe]

i suppose for those that are poor, they do all have access to emergency care, through emergency rooms.

They don't all have "health care" imo.

Shoot, most of us don't really have the health care insurance coverage that we really need if a true critical emergency came up that would not still bankrupt us and make us lose our homes and savings paying just the 20% of copays we might owe.

Medical care, good medical care is very expensive, and our own health insurance policies would not cover extensive care....they have caps on what they will spend on us, per policy.

Yes, you can get the best health care money can buy in America....look at Magic Johnson, he has been living with AIDS for 18 years now and looks healthy as ever, i would venture to say he is getting the best health care money can buy as mentioned. Alot of this IS because of government spending though....the medical break throughs and pharmacuitical break throughs that have come about the last few decades has been funded by our tax dollars going towards research and development....usually done at prestigious universities or state universities, via gvt grants.

so the average joe tax payer, whose small business owner can not afford to pay a portion of their employee's health insurance, so the employee goes without...has PAID in his tax dollars year after year after year for many of these medical break throughs and pharmacuitical break throughs, yet will not reap the benefits of such, unless on their death bed, or in an emergency situation.....then YES, of course they would get emergency care, everyone would, but this guy would get the bill for it and lose his home and all that he worked his entire life for, to pay the cost of that emergency care....or end up in bankruptcy.

it's not scarey to be poor without health care....they have nothing to lose, no home that they own, no savings that they scraped for....no car to take away that they have borrowed the money for....

it is the people that are in the middle, that work like dogs but don't make much or those that work for small businesses that can not afford healthcare as a benefit for their employees that get hurt....from these exorbitant hospital, doctor, drug and diagnosis fees/prices.

Anyway, i personally do not think that the solution is what either the democrats or the Republicans are suggesting on the health care crisis we are facing, and we are facing one, because medicare costs with all the boomers, is going to bankrupt our gvt if things don't change...something has to reign in the double digit rises in costs each year BEFORE the gvt should ever agree to fund any private or public universal plan imho. And the republican plan of health savings accounts is so miniscule to taking care of the crisis that we are in, it is laughable.

jd

[Dilloduck]

i suppose for those that are poor, they do all have access to emergency care, through emergency rooms.

They don't all have "health care" imo.

Shoot, most of us don't really have the health care insurance coverage that we really need if a true critical emergency came up that would not still bankrupt us and make us lose our homes and savings paying just the 20% of copays we might owe.

Medical care, good medical care is very expensive, and our own health insurance policies would not cover extensive care....they have caps on what they will spend on us, per policy.

Yes, you can get the best health care money can buy in America....look at Magic Johnson, he has been living with AIDS for 18 years now and looks healthy as ever, i would venture to say he is getting the best health care money can buy as mentioned. Alot of this IS because of government spending though....the medical break throughs and pharmacuitical break throughs that have come about the last few decades has been funded by our tax dollars going towards research and development....usually done at prestigious universities or state universities, via gvt grants.

so the average joe tax payer, whose small business owner can not afford to pay a portion of their employee's health insurance, so the employee goes without...has PAID in his tax dollars year after year after year for many of these medical break throughs and pharmacuitical break throughs, yet will not reap the benefits of such, unless on their death bed, or in an emergency situation.....then YES, of course they would get emergency care, everyone would, but this guy would get the bill for it and lose his home and all that he worked his entire life for, to pay the cost of that emergency care....or end up in bankruptcy.

it's not scarey to be poor without health care....they have nothing to lose, no home that they own, no savings that they scraped for....no car to take away that they have borrowed the money for....

it is the people that are in the middle, that work like dogs but don't make much or those that work for small businesses that can not afford healthcare as a benefit for their employees that get hurt....from these exorbitant hospital, doctor, drug and diagnosis fees/prices.

Anyway, i personally do not think that the solution is what either the democrats or the Republicans are suggesting on the health care crisis we are facing, and we are facing one, because medicare costs with all the boomers, is going to bankrupt our gvt if things don't change...something has to reign in the double digit rises in costs each year BEFORE the gvt should ever agree to fund any private or public universal plan imho. And the republican plan of health savings accounts is so miniscule to taking care of the crisis that we are in, it is laughable.

jd

In other words, the government owes us health care at a price we would be comfortable paying because our tax money was used to develop drugs and procedures to help us live longer ? What do you suggest be done to rein in double digit rises in cost ?
Life expectancy ( a great word for discussion btw) has nearly doubled in the last century. The old option was to die. It should come as no surprise that the longer we live the more maintenance our bodies need. If we took care of them better we would need even less. The vast majority of health expense occurs in the very last year you are alive.

[JohnDoe]

In other words, the government owes us health care at a price we would be comfortable paying because our tax money was used to develop drugs and procedures to help us live longer ? What do you suggest be done to rein in double digit rises in cost ?
Life expectancy ( a great word for discussion btw) has nearly doubled in the last century. The old option was to die. It should come as no surprise that the longer we live the more maintenance our bodies need. If we took care of them better we would need even less. The vast majority of health expense occurs in the very last year you are alive.

No one wants to talk about it, but health care insurance companies are 30% of our costs for healthcare in this country...this is a HUGE amount of wasted money that goes towards no medical procedures and actual health care for the individual.

The burdensome, inefficient, paperwork/billing system in all hospital/medical facilities is aproximately 25% of the cost of healthcare. Refining this could save us a bundle!

The cost of prescriptions for the entire world is put upon our shoulders. This is inherrently UNFAIR and so costly to us that it will bankrupt our country. Part of this is because in the pill bill, it was writen in that we can not negotiate for bulk purchases with the Pharma industry and they are also protected in this sham of a bill from us purchasing drugs on the free market...this is costing us BILLIONS if not eventually trillions IN TAX PAYER DOLLARS for prescriptions that are one tenth the price in Canada or France or Spain or Australia etc....us Americans are paying for the research and development costs of drugs for the ENTIRE WORLD, this has to change.

also, corporations could work with insurance companies to get their employees on a healthy track lifestyle for discounts from insurance companies and bettering our lives also in the mean time.

There is also the issue with the millions of uninsured using the emergency room verses a regular doctor in an office as their healthcare provider. Emergency rooms cost 70% more than seeing a doctor in an office. These people do not have the money to pay their bills and the cost of this comes on to us, through the higher cost of health insurance for us and through our taxes that foots the rest....something can be done about this.... in massachusetts, before the universal health care plan that is now in place, the State bought healthcare insurance policies for all of their Medicaid qualified recipiants....ended up saving the state millions in emergency room visit costs....in medicaid moneys for the indigent from what i understand.


This is NOT a one liner sollution type situation...comprehensive healthcare reform is needed....there are a kazillion things that can be done to reign the cost of health care to an affordable amount imo....

jd

[Dilloduck]

No one wants to talk about it, but health care insurance companies are 30% of our costs for healthcare in this country...this is a HUGE amount of wasted money that goes towards no medical procedures and actual health care for the individual.

The burdensome, inefficient, paperwork/billing system in all hospital/medical facilities is aproximately 25% of the cost of healthcare. Refining this could save us a bundle!

The cost of prescriptions for the entire world is put upon our shoulders. This is inherrently UNFAIR and so costly to us that it will bankrupt our country. Part of this is because in the pill bill, it was writen in that we can not negotiate for bulk purchases with the Pharma industry and they are also protected in this sham of a bill from us purchasing drugs on the free market...this is costing us BILLIONS if not eventually trillions IN TAX PAYER DOLLARS for prescriptions that are one tenth the price in Canada or France or Spain or Australia etc....us Americans are paying for the research and development costs of drugs for the ENTIRE WORLD, this has to change.

also, corporations could work with insurance companies to get their employees on a healthy track lifestyle for discounts from insurance companies and bettering our lives also in the mean time.

There is also the issue with the millions of uninsured using the emergency room verses a regular doctor in an office as their healthcare provider. Emergency rooms cost 70% more than seeing a doctor in an office. These people do not have the money to pay their bills and the cost of this comes on to us, through the higher cost of health insurance for us and through our taxes that foots the rest....something can be done about this.... in massachusetts, before the universal health care plan that is now in place, the State bought healthcare insurance policies for all of their Medicaid qualified recipiants....ended up saving the state millions in emergency room visit costs....in medicaid moneys for the indigent from what i understand.


This is NOT a one liner sollution type situation...comprehensive healthcare reform is needed....there are a kazillion things that can be done to reign the cost of health care to an affordable amount imo....

jd

Did all that money that the state saved reduce your taxes any ?

[DrJohn]

So let me get this straight....

Liberal = Dem

Dem = Socialist

McCain = GOP

McCain = liberal

so, the GOP is socialist since McCain is (presumably) their presidential candidate.

[JohnDoe]

Did all that money that the state saved reduce your taxes any ?
not that i know about, i believe they chose to cover MORE people without health insurance with the savings....those that were above the gvt chosen poverty level numbers but still poor none the less...the ones that are usually left out of gvt help....

jd

[Dilloduck]

not that i know about, i believe they chose to cover MORE people without health insurance with the savings....those that were above the gvt chosen poverty level numbers but still poor none the less...the ones that are usually left out of gvt help....

jd

So they took the money of people who had it and spent it on the ones who didnt have it ?

[JohnDoe]

So they took the money of people who had it and spent it on the ones who didnt have it ?
Yes, of course, THAT IS WHAT THE GVT DOES, with ALL of our tax monies.....they TAKE it from us and make Boeing, and halliburton, and kelogg brown and root and Merk and exxon/mobile and the Saudis, and the Corn Farmers, and the Pharma businesses etc, etc, etc RICHER!

jd

[Dilloduck]

Yes, of course, THAT IS WHAT THE GVT DOES, with ALL of our tax monies.....they TAKE it from us and make Boeing, and halliburton, and kelogg brown and root and Merk and exxon/mobile and the Saudis, and the Corn Farmers, and the Pharma businesses etc, etc, etc RICHER!

jd

They gave my tax money to Exxon?? I guess Exxon owes me a couple of surgeries or something. :laugh2:

[retiredman]

Everyone already has access to health care and will continue to get it until Americans can stomach watching someone die on the side of the road.

is that cost effective? is that moral?

[Dilloduck]

is that cost effective? is that moral?

no it's just the truth. Americans generally can't stand the sight of the poor, the sick, the mentally ill, the hungry etc. They aren't real crazy about the handicapped or disfigured. They don't want to see it and think someone needs to do something about it. Someone ELSE that is.
While working at the state hospital it became very apparent that Americans were glad to shell out a few bucks if someone would babysit the crazies, drunks and druggies of the world. They will donate to agencies to house and feed the homless. Anything to just make em disappear.

[retiredman]

no it's just the truth. Americans generally can't stand the sight of the poor, the sick, the mentally ill, the hungry etc. They aren't real crazy about the handicapped or disfigured. They don't want to see it and think someone needs to do something about it. Someone ELSE that is.
While working at the state hospital it became very apparent that Americans were glad to shell out a few bucks if someone would babysit the crazies, drunks and druggies of the world. They will donate to agencies to house and feed the homless. Anything to just make em disappear.

regardless of the morality, what do you think would be more cost effective?

[Dilloduck]

regardless of the morality, what do you think would be more cost effective?

People taking care of each other like they used to.

[retiredman]

People taking care of each other like they used to.

and, until late 20th century republican self centered greed took over, I would have agreed with you... unfortuately, Americans caring for other Americans is apparently not a natural instinct anymore, but nonetheless, a reasonable function of government, especially in the absence of that former sense of charity.

[Dilloduck]

and, until late 20th century republican self centered greed took over, I would have agreed with you... unfortuately, Americans caring for other Americans is apparently not a natural instinct anymore, but nonetheless, a reasonable function of government, especially in the absence of that former sense of charity.

Don't be a silly ass partisan. Greed and selfishness have no politics.

[retiredman]

Don't be a silly ass partisan. Greed and selfishness have no politics.

I disagree. I am perfectly willing to do with less so that those less fortunate than me can have enough.

[Dilloduck]

I disagree. I am perfectly willing to do with less so that those less fortunate than me can have enough.

I didn't say you weren't a nice guy----It was a response to your insinuation that Republicans caused all the greed. There aren't any "good guys" and "bad guys". Can't you see how that is much to easy of a paradigm to look at all this shit though ? It keeps us enemies and weak.

[retiredman]

I didn't say you weren't a nice guy----It was a response to your insinuation that Republicans caused all the greed. There aren't any "good guys" and "bad guys". Can't you see how that is much to easy of a paradigm to look at all this shit though ? It keeps us enemies and weak.

I do no think that republicans caused all the greed.

[Dilloduck]

I do no think that republicans caused all the greed.


until late 20th century republican self centered greed took over

whatever

[bullypulpit]

Let's just call them who they really are: Socialists/communists.

What the MSM calls the left in this country is really the center. The left is represented by the tattered remains of the socialist/communist parties in America.