becoming socialist
Find a Conversation
becoming socialist
| Fri, 10-03-2008 - 9:56pm |
Is there anything for the citizens who don't want to become socialists to do. What should I be doing? I don't want our country on that path and it seems it is.

Pages
A huge part of this mess was the middle and upper classes buying more house than they could afford and compounding their debt load with huge home equity loans to finance consumer spending. These people have been walking away from their houses now that they're worth less than they owe, every bubble eventually bursts, including real estate, as it did in the 20,
dablacksox
Cynic: a blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.---Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary.
Guild Member since 2009
dablacksox
Cynic: a blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.---Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary.
dablacksox
Cynic: a blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.---Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary.
That's not 100 percent correct.
Sopal
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" />
"They would nationalize everything if they could and take 90% of your pay. Imagine a government that chooses your car, house, food, and cloths for you."
I could ask where I posted that he made those statements. But I won't, because we both know I did not say that. Obviously my opinion on what they would really like to do.
And, of course, you knew that, but posted your question anyway. Quite misleading of you, isn't it? That tactic is a true tenet of the left. Off you go...
That's not 100 percent correct.
Have you lost your mind?
YOU posted up those few sentences - the ones I've quoted twice now, and asked you to show me where either Obama or Biden has said anything like it (which, of course you can't - I'm glad that you're at least tethered to reality enough to admit that; there's at least one multi-named poster who wouldn't even do THAT, were he in the same situation).
I KNOW the sentences I quoted are "your opinion of what (Obama & Biden) would really like to do," instead of, you know, what they ACTUALLY SAY THEY WANT TO DO. That's WHY I asked you to back up your rather ridiculous suppositions with anything resembling evidence. Since none of us - that I'm aware of - possess a crystal ball, allowing us to see into the future and judge how closely any given candidate's campaign-trail words and promises match up with their actual actions once elected, we all kind of have to take them at their word(s). Sure, it's common wisdom that political candidates often lie, or even merely tell people what they think they want to hear.
But the reason we pay attention to what candidates say on the campaign trail is because even knowing what I just described, it's just not accurate to say all politicians lie 100% of the time. I would say, in fact, most DO try to give a pretty accurate picture of the type of leader they'd be - otherwise, how will people know what they're VOTING FOR?
That's why it's important, when confronted with dreck such as yours about "what Obama will REALLY do" to ask if there's any, ANY, indication from any of the things they've said or done to support such ridiculous suppositions. And, in your case, when you talk about "government selecting your clothes and the car you drive" as well as taking 90% of your paycheck, etc. there is, of course, ZERO evidence in either Biden's or Obama's words to support such nutty assertions.
It's not "misleading" of me to ask you for support for your claims - not at all. You're right, we both are playing a bit of a semantic game here - but if anything, YOU are the one who began it, when you posted up a clinker of a hysterical, bed-wetting paragraph like that one with literally ZERO evidence of any kind to support it. You're the one who entered the realm of fantasy role-playing by giving us that wholly unrealistic picture of what you just KNOW Obama would like to do (contrary to literally all the evidence in existence)....so I, playing along with your fantasy, ask you to show all the (nonexistent) support for your "theory."
And you call it a "misleading tactic of the left" to ask that people be able to back up their bloviations?
Wow.
I'll try to keep that in mind in the future when dealing with you: you feel asking for supporting evidence for wild-a$$ claims is "unfair" or "a misleading tactic."
First of all, that's my opinion and I don't have to back it up to you or anyone else. Put it in the category of "tough crap".
Second, I request that you immediately cease with the slurs and personal attacks such as "Have you lost your mind?", "when confronted with dreck such as yours", "such nutty assertions" and "clinker of a hysterical, bed-wetting paragraph like...". How well thought out, truly impressive!
You've made plenty of posts in the past that could be treated with the same disrespect and name calling that you have decided to use here. I assure you, most anyone is fully capable of going to the lowest common denominator as you have decided to do. That's easy. But, what you have done is effectively ended the debate.
I find responses like yours to be lacking any coherent thought, and down right rude.
I don't mind a heated debate, but keep your juvenile, baseless attacks to yourself.Pages