Story Comments
Posted by: JaimieM 1 year, 1 month ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
26%
JaimieM1 year, 1 month ago
-
27%
JaimieM1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The first of the tapes I saw is at: http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/10/27/obama-bo...
Reply
Is this the Obama-gate coverup?-
80%
Candida1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
JaimieM: "This is the second Obama tape leaking out about his core beliefs. This stuff will be - and I would venture, should be - downright scary to a lot of people."
Reply
What do you find so scary? That the Constitution is not perfect? Didn't President Bush say something to the effect that it's just a damn piece of paper? You don't even know what Obama is talking about because the clip is totally taken out of context. Yet another non-issue, just like the first tape to which you've posted the link above.-
-
0%
orndorffter1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You do know that you may be watching a tape you think is Obama, and all the same time it may have his face and all on there, but neww tec has found a way to make you think you are actualy watching Obama and at the same time it can be a fonney.
Reply-
0%
orndorffter1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What I'm trying to say is, that the new technology they have now , say anyone of yousor we'll use Sarha Palin for exsample, see how she had her face and her voice but they simplie took that and it made seem it was Palin in the swim suit but there is much more that they can do with types now a days and you never know the differeance of what has been done to make you think that it really is the person your watching and listing to and all the same time the taype has been aultered. So how can we be sure that we are watching and listenin to Obama on the tayps of him or not?
Reply -
-
-
33%
EHS1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What do you say about all of his Muslim and Arab friends? Khalid Al Mansour who financed Obama through law shcool. Mansour is Kind Aud's attorney to represent Opec. Rashid Khalidi, support of palestinian aggression against Israel and behind the Arab Action network. Convicted Syrian Tony Rezko. Valerie jarett from Shiraz, Iran his chief advisor. What about his Marxist quotes?
Reply
There is so much more....Even with his Acorn friends.-
0%
orndorffter1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I cannot give you an answer because I would be lieing if I said that I kenw, I think we both need hep on this one,maybe you direct your question to--- one of the guys here at propeller he knows a lo and thats -mesodude - now you have me wondering If you get that answered let me know, this is the frist I have ever been stumped..
Reply
-
-
-
100%
ETproductions1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Repuke Smear Machine is puking America's ears now in high gear now. Sludge from Drudge 24 hours a day up to Nov. 4th.
Reply
I've heard the complete speech in context. The point about "redistributive change" was NOT a criticism of the Constitution. He was talking about the Civil Rights movement of the 60s and saying that the movement focused too much on the courts and not enough on organizing in communities to bring "redistributive change." He was saying the minorities should have looked more toward pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps.
-
-
74%
earthlingerer1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'd have to hear a bit more from before the carefully trimmed quote to hear which flaw Obama was referring to, otherwise, it would be impossible for any person to understand what exactly is meant.
Reply
If Obama has a "secret plan" to change the constitution, at least he's keeping it secret, unlike the current administration.-
83%
lfergie8121 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
earthlingerer
Reply
Just like the other audio posted of Obama redistributing the wealth, audio tape can be edited to say anything the editor wants it to. Without the full uncut audio to listen to there is no way to determine even the actual topic of the conversation and parts of the conversation can be taken out of context.-
0%
EHS1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What do you say about his Marxist quotes and all of his Arab friends. I can name many. Khalid Al Mansour Islamic billionaire put Obama through law school. What about his colllege Pakistan roommates? What about Wm Ayers speaking at a World EDucation Forum in Caracas, Venezuela hosted by Hugo Chavez stating the failures of capitalist education and how he and Obama were changing that. They worked together with radical reforms. What about his associations with the radical acorn group? They sued banks for loans people couldn't afford.
Reply-
100%
pboccuti1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I know what people are going to say, stop bringing George W. Bush into this, but you cannot not talk about Bush. You want to talk about people's associations, yet nobody ever talks about the Bush Family's associations. Lets start with the NAZI Party before and during WWII. Then we can go on to Saddam. Next up, The Taliban. Finally we have public enemy number one, Osama Bin Ladin. I can't go into depth about each of these relationship on a website because I don't have the required time to sit hear and type everything out. All I can ask is that people do a little research on their own.
Reply
People need to know about the dubious connections of our current criminal administration. This way they should realize how they have been lied to over the past 8 years and how all the Bushsh!t tha happened to us could have been avoided if people would have voted for Al Gore in 2000.
Wait a second, the general public did vote for Al Gore. It was just that Jeb Bush promised Florida to George Bush and wala, Florida had a voting issue and George Bush ended up winning Florida. How ironic.
-
-
100%
rimbaud1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cutting down Obama is not going to get McCain elected. The Republicans discredit themselves by parroting stuff from Drudge. If I want to vote against Obama, I'm sure not going to vote Republican! If I'm liberal, I'll vote for Ralph Nader. If I'm conservative, I'll vote for Bob Barr.
Reply
http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/election_2008/2...
How about PROMOTING your preferred candidate, instead of these lame attempts at cutting down his rival! -
-
-
100%
Beau78901 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This extremely short audio could easily be of Obama speaking about ANY topic.
Reply
The original Constitution had flaws. THAT'S WHY WE HAVE AMENDMENTS.
Anyone remember this little doozy from Article I, Section 2?
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
-
-
-
-
83%
vor1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I find it hysterical that supporters of the Party that has presided over the largest redistribution of wealth in our history dare to suggest Obama carries some evil hidden agenda or that wealth redistribution is a purely Marxist or Socialist concept. Of course much of this current redistribution has sent money outside of this country, hiding American funds in foreign accounts and the outright turning over of funds to foreign entities through bad policy.
Reply
The middle class in particular has taken a real screwing. Show me any statistic that indicates a shift of wealth in any direction but upward and away from the average American (median annual income of $48,000) during the Bush Administration.
You folks are just shills for these people. I don't believe you are among the top 5 percent of wage earners. Not for a second. But you are the dupes for their interests! How did you ever get in such a position?
I admire those like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett who earn their fortunes but then have no issue with voluntarily redistributing their wealth. They seem to understand this strange concept that "I am my brother's keeper". If they were the norm, the status quo among the wealthiest Americans there would be no issue. Then this whole trickle down concept might actually have some merit. Instead they are the rare and notable exceptions. All because of one single word - GREED!-
80%
antibrainwasher1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
7 days to go, and here's another republican desperate circle jerk.
Reply
You mindless moron repugnicons are pathetic.
If you could just stop hating and your fear of progress, and step out of your religous ignorance status quo demigogary for a split second, your house of cards would collapse and you could see the light.
But you are all cowards, yellow bellied cowards, to afraid to see the truth, so you keep on projectile vomiting your bile and lies and putrid swiftboating crap, and it drags the country down the toilet where you reside.
No ignorance like religious arrogant ignorance. No scum like republiscum. -
29%
beavith11 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
my god. the inmates want to run the asylum. case in point.
Reply
"The middle class in particular has taken a real screwing."
if you don't like what you're earning in your job, improve yourself and get a REAL job. stop being jealous about other's success.
its really very simple.
don't be average.
be smart. be hard working. be lucky.
but don't blame others for your incompetence.
but that's the new american way right? blame others. get even. cry.
dupes? no. it just makes you (dems) stupes....
"I admire those like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett who earn their fortunes but then have no issue with voluntarily redistributing their wealth."
that's stupid AND disgusting. dyathink that maybe they have SO much money it doesn't matter to them? for those of us on the cusp of being obamawealthy, maybe it DOES matter? i'm the triple threat: i'm smart, i work hard and i'm lucky. WTF does O have to say about that? 'thank you very much for being productive. here's your 30% tax increase'. wait. he doesn't even say thank you. its more like "FU, here's your 30% tax increase."
if i'm my brothers keeper, i'd like to put a shoe on your a$& and tell you get to freaking work.
and just to let you in on a what seems to be a secret concept to you, there is no economics in the world that is based on redistribution of wealth. all that does is make everyone poorer.-
100%
djn3nunez31 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
just to let you in on a what seems to be a secret concept to you, there is no economics in the world that is based on redistribution of wealth. all that does is make everyone poorer
Reply
Riiiight.
As originally adopted in 1975, the earned income tax credit was intended to offset the Social Security taxes of low-income workers with children and to provide those taxpayers with an increased incentive to work. An eligible taxpayer could claim a refundable credit equal to 10 percent of the taxpayer's earned income for the taxable year, which did not exceed $4,000
The earned income tax credit is an income transfer program that provides significant financial assistance to low-income workers, especially those with children. Unlike increasing the minimum wage, the expansion of the earned income credit over the past two decades has provided benefits targeted to help the working poor. Also, unlike most other welfare programs or a negative income tax, the earned income tax credit provides significant work incentives to low-income workers (Forman 1988: 67-77). Indeed, as currently structured, the earned income tax credit is one of the federal government's largest and most effective antipoverty programs.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cf...
-
-
-
-
72%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
JaimieM,
Reply
Amazing! This is the second video that lasts less than 30 seconds. It's easy to change the context and meaning of the message when you use sound bites. Obviously, he said what is being played, but what exactly is the message? Here again we have a bunch of scared right wingers grasping at straws in attempt to divert from real issues.
BTW - The Constitution was written 300 years ago by men who had to compromise their religious, philosophical, and political views. Of course there would be some flaws. Unless you think the Constitution is the equivalent to the Bible?! (That statement is for you Neocon faithful that equate the Constitution to a "religious" proclamation).
Next...saying there are "flaws" within the Constitution is a hellava lot better than GW's claim that it's a goddamn piece of paper!-
39%
Dash-RipRock1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here we go again. What does Bush have to do with this. NOTHING. I think quite a lot of us NOW feel that the Bush Administration was out of control at the very least. I personally think he turned out to be an idiot and he is HISTORY. We can't go back and change what Bush and his minion have done. We have to move forward.
Reply
So, once again, Bush has nothing to do with this, neither does McCain. That is what Obama said, and that is what Obama believes. There is NO SECRET, Obama believes in Redistirbution of wealth (Spreading the wealth around) and that is what he wants to do.
Doesn't matter what kind of spin Biden, Obama and their campaign try to put on things. Obama believes in it and has clearly said it.
Unlike Obama and Biden try to say, McCain did not say that Obama is a Socialist because he wants to lower the taxes on the middle class, he said it because Obama wants to take the wealth of the few and redistribute it to the many and create more Tax funded Welfare programs.
That is Socialism by definition, and Obama is a Socialist..
True, there are many variations of Socialism, but it doesn't matter which variation you use, IT IS STILL SOCIALISM.
Definition of Socialism:
==================
Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.
Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and creates an unequal society.
====================
So, I don't quite understand why people are still trying to deny that Obama is a socialist. At the VERY LEAST, it seems that EVERYONE, Democrats, Republicans, Independants, Conservatives and Liberals should be a little worried about what Obama's Socialists plans will do to America.-
77%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dash-RipRock,
Reply
"Here we go again. What does Bush have to do with this. NOTHING."
I'm surprised that you didn't resort to "There you go again Dark Wizard...living in the past."
Anyway, I say, au contraire...McCain has voted for Bush policies more than any other Republican; 90% of the time (his own words)! I think the comparison to GW is very relevant. Of course, you are hoping that we forget the past and we all know what the saying is for that…right?! Or, maybe, some of you don’t…because obviously we keep revisiting the folly of the past through either corrupt politicians or stupid politicians on both sides of the aisle.
Now go ahead and play the Clinton card for trying to bow out of blame for the repealing of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, but we all know that that only added to the deregulation wet dreams the Republicans have had for the last 30 years. Trying to push this off on ACORN or Barney Franks won’t work either. Again, they only allowed for loosening on venues the Republicans, big business, oil, the banks, and Wall Street took extreme advantage of while ignoring sound business practices.
But who am I kidding here…you’ve already made up your mind about who’s to blame and who will fix things. I’m just amazed that you actually believe that McCain/Palin is the answer! You think you know what redistribution of wealth means, but you also think that socialism is bad when a police state is looking more like what we’re getting under Bush. Yes, Bush is still relevant until he’s out of office and can’t put his signature on another piece of paper as President.
Societies evolve over time out of necessity or they perish. Our society is no different and has to make changes to survive. The Constitution allows for those changes to happen as our Founding Fathers were very wise. Unfortunately, the Republic they had back then with a fraction of the population we have now and all the problems that come with advancements, is nothing like what we’ve become today. So, you act as if going in a new direction is a bad thing when it is only the natural progression of society trying to survive. I know change is scary for many of the less adaptable of our species, but don’t worry…most of us will survive and become stronger. Others will get caught in the tar pits…-
22%
Dash-RipRock1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Once again, I ask, WHAT DOES BUSH OR MCCAIN HAVE TO DO WITH OBAMA STATING WHAT HE TRULY FEELS.. NOTHING... They weren't around when the Constitution was written. Ok, Maybe McCain was... (That's just a joke!)
Reply
But why can't you stick to the topic of this article/video. Seems like all you do is want to try to change the topic. The topic of is what OBAMA SAID.
This is COMPLETELY off the topic of the original article/post, and I hate changing the topic and burying the real issue which is what OBAMA SAID.
But, if you want to talk about not forgetting the past, then I ask, why does Obama want to forget the past when Charlie Gibson clearly explained what happened during the Depression when Hoover RAISED TAXES ? He explained that it drug out the Depression and made things worse and that Obama wanting to raise taxes will repeat history and cause the same thing again!
Obama's reply?? It might and it might not!! Typical Obama BS of not answering the question with a straight answer. Look, I am not a Republican, I'm Independent (Honest)...
I personally may have voted for Hillary over McCain even, because as I have said in other posts, in my opinion there were better and more qualified candidates on both sides, but unfortunately, we ended up with McCain and Obama.
Also, like I said, personally, I think Bush and his administration, AT THE VERY LEAST, really screwed things up, but I still do not want to live under a Socialist Government, and that is where Obama will take us.
So, I have told you my feelings on this. I personally wish that the BOTH SIDES would have nominated other candidates because I don't think McCain/Palin NOR Obama/Biden are the right answer to our problems.
So, I am curious, do you have even a tinge of regret, as I do, that McCain and Obama are the only real choices that have the possibility of winning or are you honestly whole heartedly 110% into the belief that Obama is the answer?-
100%
DarkWizard1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dash-RipRock,
Reply
Sadly, you are the one missing the point. We are all discussing the video/tape of what Obama said, but you seem to misinterpret or ignore the fact that the answers being presented are not in support of your narrow point of view.
This seems to be an ongoing problem when trying to converse with those of your ilk. I find it quite challenging and neigh impossible to find common ground with those that are only able to see one side of an argument. It is unfortunate that a real dialogue cannot occur when one's views are so limited. Do not blame yourself! You can only work with what you've been given. Only counseling or mind expanding drugs could assist you in shaking the shackles of the chains on your mind.
-
-
-
67%
kobzikov1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"What does Bush have to do with this."
Reply
You might not recall, but Bush wanted to change the Constitution not too long ago. Did you forget that he wanted to enact an amendment on marriage defining it as between man and a woman??? Does that ring any bells?
One's desire to change existing law implies that the law is flawed in some manner in the person's view.
I realize that McCain did not support this, but if you would like an example of how McCain thinks Constitution is flawed then see his opinion on Supreme Court decision that detainees on Guantanamo have habeas corpus rights. I don't know about others, but it's very difficult for me to believe that McCain would enforce the Constitution considering what he said about the decision.
I find it quite ironic that when you use Wikipedia's definition of Socialism you cull the parts that don't actually define Socialism. History of where socialism originated, how it will be achieved and views of Socialists on Capitalism might be interesting and informative, but they do not define what Socialism is any more then history of where Christianity originated, how it was spread, and Christian views on Islam define Christian dogma or what it means to be a Christian.
According to Wikipedia,
"Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society".
This is the primary definition of Socialism. If you check any dictionary then you'll see that state or collective control, administration and distribution of the means of production are the defining aspects of Socialism present in virtually every definition, not what you cited as shared belief, which is most of the time is not even mentioned.
What you cited as a shared belief about Capitalism is a completely bogus criteria for calling someone a Socialist. For example, there are individuals who believe that Capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society, but at the same time also think that it is the most egalitarian system that has been implemented so far, or who think that the effects can be mitigated through ethical consumption, or through increased community involvement, individual involvement, increased charity, etc instead of through state regulation and control. None of these people are Socialists.-
-
100%
kobzikov1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Apparently reading comprehension is not your forte. I've clearly stated in my response and I quote "when you use Wikipedia's definition..." in reference to your quotes.
Reply
Clearly there is something wrong if you couldn't even grasp something that basic.
-
-
33%
Dash-RipRock1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hmm.. Not sure what happened there, but I tried to edit my post and it didn't accept it.
Reply
Anyway, I said that you are putting words into wikipedia now. Wikipedia DOES NOT SAY THAT IS THE PRIMARY DEFINITION OF SOCIALISM.
Even in your post, it clearly says "A BROAD SET OF ECONOMIC THEORIES" and I clearly stated that there are many variations.
Unlike you, I was trying to stick to the topic of Obama and his ideas which are clearly defined in Wikipedia as Socialist ideas.
I also find it quite ironic that you cull and decide parts of the definition of Socialism and decide which is right and which is wrong. That's quite funny.
At any rate, weather we agree or not, and disregarding anything to do with Obama, America or anything I have said. Can you at least answer the question below?
Would you mind living under a Socialist Government?
Don't get me wrong either. I'm not saying that Socialism is bad or good. I am simply saying that I do not want to live under a Socialist Government no matter where I live in the world. Socialism is not for me, but maybe for others, it may be a better choice, or, it may not even be a better choice. It may simply be the choice they want to make.-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
dash;
Reply
Don't get me wrong either. I'm not saying that Socialism is bad or good. I am simply saying that I do not want to live under a Socialist Government no matter where I live in the world. Socialism is not for me, but maybe for others, it may be a better choice, or, it may not even be a better choice. It may simply be the choice they want to make.
Well you already are living under a socialist Gov.-
-
100%
kobzikov1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why don't you explain it to someone like Warren Buffet or all the other economists supporting Obama. Clearly you are much smarter then all of them put together, so please talk to them, because they clearly don't know what they are doing when they endorse Obama or support his proposals.
Reply
I'm not planning to answer any questions regarding anything socialist from someone who doesn't know what the word means and who thinks that a person must have some kind of beliefs regarding capitalism to be socialist, which is mind-numbingly idiotic. Not to mention someone who lacks basic reading comprehension skills as I previously demonstrated.-
0%
Dash-RipRock1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, there you go putting words into my mouth now. You are the one that needs to improve your reading comprehension skills! I didn't say you had to have ANY BELIEFS IN ANYTHING. I quoted what Wikipedia clearly states is one form of Socialism. What don't you understand?
Reply
And it just cracks me up that not a single Dem/Lib has answered that question. I figured you would come up with some lame idiotic excuse just like you did. Just like Obama does whenever he is asked questions. I guess it's above your pay grade.-
Neutral
kobzikov1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can answer your question using the accepted definition that I quoted from Wikipedia and that can be found in most reference sources, including Merriam-Webster's, American Heritage Dctionary, Oxford Dictionary.
Reply
Since you introduced a definition for the word with which I'm unfamiliar, then I can't use it until I understand it, which I can't do until every following question has been answered. I might have additional questions depending on your answers.
"What don't you understand?"
How does holding certain views about a different economic system make one socialist? What is socialism according to you? If everyone in US believed that capitalist system is unfair, but did not alter the system in any way would you consider US socialist? If everyone in US government believed that capitalist system is unfair, but did not attempt to alter the system in any way would US government be socialist? US has laws on the books that attempt to make capitalist system fair, such as prohibition on child labor laws, anti-sweatshop laws, anti-trust laws, does that mean US is socialist? If so, doesn't that mean we already live under socialist government?
If someone is against sweatshop labor or child labor are they socialist? If not, why not?
If someone considers capitalist system unfair, but supports and promotes it because the system concentrates large amounts of wealth and power in their hands are they socialist?
-
-
-
-
-
0%
Dash-RipRock1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey BTW, Hannibal,
Reply
It's odd when people people complain about our Government and say we are already living under a socialist Government.
Why would you want more socialism other then for more handouts?
Of course I doubt you will answer that question either.
At any rate, It's absolutely true, that we have all kinds of social programs. Too many if you ask me! BUT, I do recognize that there are people who do need help. But, MANY of these people have children they should not have had until they were responsible enough and in a situation that they could afford to raise children properly. MANY of these people just plain live outside of their means instead of setting a budget and living within their means. Now, don't put words in my mouth either. I'm not saying ALL, I'm saying MANY.
My problem with the situation is MANY people choose to live off of certain programs and not use them as interim stepping stones while they are working to take responsibility and improve their own lives and their own futures.
I've personally seen it with my own cousin and it really ticks me off. Many times these programs make people LAZY and make it too easy for them not to strive to succeed in life.-
100%
HannibalBarca1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sure I will answer any question put to me
Reply
First, I am not complaining about socialism, I am just pointing out you lack of understanding that what Obama is proposing is not socialism, and that socialism is already apparent in your Republic.
I work for my money, and ask not nor get handouts.
Your personal views on the horrors of handouts due to lazy people can be matched each and every time by handouts to greedy rich people.
I am a Canadian, living in a socialist country in the eyes of many Americans, but if those who hold that view studied our socialist programs, they will find that USA also has them in place in their Gov, under different names .
Labels scare Americans, your political system is set up so all issues are black and white, but grey is by far the bigger colour, and to go there, one is labeled.
Your story of your cousin,,,sad but it is not a yardstick as you make it sound like, nor is the CEO who is in front of the Senate committee trying to explain why his company went bankrupt but in the last 5 years he was able to suck $500 million out of it in wages and bonuses.
Show me a specific socialist example of Obama and I will show you a Rep view of the same caliber.
-
-
-
-
-
100%
AJ771 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why worry? Most free and democratic nations have some "socialist" policies. We already do, medicaid, medicare, foodstamps, welfare .. .need I go on. So take a deep breath. Feeding poor children, making sure that people have access to healthcare - those are not things to worry about. Obama does not want everyone to be equal. There will be wealthy and poor, but give me a break, it is miserable for a nation with our potential to cling to the idea that providing any kind of help for the poor and lower middle class is somehow endangering us. In fact, a country that does not provide for its poor faces the biggest threat. Fat happy people don't revolt. Look at France. There was a huge gap between the aristocracy and the poor. What happened? Revolustion. No conuntry needs that.
Reply
By the way, 700 billion dollars taken from americans to pay for the interests of the banks, who the government bought interests in. Sounds like government ownership of private business. hmm. communism maybe. Please don't strike up fear mongering. Our way of life is not endangered by social programs. -
100%
Beau78901 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dash:
Reply
This link about the White House and Treasury wanting to extend the $700 billion (actually $850 billion) bailout to the auto industry contains a graphic that shows exactly how much of our banking industry the government has recently purchased.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/business/28auto....
If you click on the graphic to blow it up (it's at the left right at the top of the story), you'll see that our government now owns $125 billion of stock in banks, and promises to DOUBLE that soon.
Government ownership of private industry? What do we call that? -
100%
djn3nunez31 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So, I don't quite understand why people are still trying to deny that Obama is a socialist.
Reply
There is a tax program in this country that gives money to low income families even if they didn't pay taxes, they get money. It redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor. You're calling that socialism? We've had it since the early 70's. Obama plans to repeal the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy.
"The earned income tax credit is an income transfer program that provides significant financial assistance to low-income workers, especially those with children. Unlike increasing the minimum wage, the expansion of the earned income credit over the past two decades has provided benefits targeted to help the working poor. Also, unlike most other welfare programs or a negative income tax, the earned income tax credit provides significant work incentives to low-income workers (Forman 1988: 67-77). Indeed, as currently structured, the earned income tax credit is one of the federal government's largest and most effective antipoverty programs."
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cf...
Now if you want to see an example of a Marxist government in action really redistributing wealth, look at Bolivia or several other latin American countries. Obama is not a Marxist.-
33%
Dash-RipRock1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why can't you guys answer simple questions and why do you put words in other peoples mouths? I said he is a socialist, not a marxist. Obamas ideas are clearly socialist ideas.
Reply
I know there is a system that already gives money to irresponsible people who don't strive to succeed in this country. I don't feel that I or anyone else should be forced to help pay for other peoples lack of responsibility and interest in their own lives. I'm not rich, and my parents weren't rich either, but I worked hard to make a good life for myself and I didn't expect anyone to give me anyone elses money to make a success of my life. I live within my means and don't have kids that I can't afford.
I DO feel that there should be welfare, but only for a limited time. Like 2 years total in a persons life. That should be more then enough time to get back on your feet and get a job.
If people feel they make enough money to give to others, then that should be their choice.
Now, I'll ask a question and make it clear. Disregarding Obamas ideas, America or anything I stated. I am not saying that Socialism is bad or good. I do not want to live under a socialist Government anywhere I live. It is not right for me, but it may be what others choose to do.
Would you mind living under a Sociaist Government?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
100%
Leemck021 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If the People did get scared from W's preemptive strikes, Patriot Act, economic policy leading to the financial melt down, trade policy and torture, Obama is a cake walk. McCain being a Republican, he will want to do as bad as 'W' and heaven help us if Palin inherits the Top Executive and CinC position.
Reply
Just give it a rest, like we are that concerned about the nation, the Constitution when we would not challenge the voter irregularities in 2000 and 2004.
-
loading ...
People Who Liked This Comment (11)
Patience
PinkyPie
Klarissa
Karlyc
normallysilent
zaph22
memestryker
Nixie
redtomatoPeople Who Didn't Like This Comment (31)
-
bonaroo
-
Ratskii
-
Eagle_Eye
-
rumple4skin
-
donald51
-
vor
-
ETproductions
-
jovial
-
decipher
-
dadesider
-
Beau7890
-
Goppy
-
Dionys
-
kobzikov
-
jrmunro
-
ProudBlueTexan
-
skeek
-
PsychoHosebeast
-
onlyonesecret
-
blowback
-
beymudakov
-
dissent
-
DenCuddy
-
burntorange
-
hefaa1
-
antibrainwasher
-
Progressive
-
pboccuti
-
AbsolutelyNO2Obama
-
Kowabunga
-
TFL
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.