« Back to story "Thanksgiving- A Case for Capitalism"

Story Comments

Posted by: Goppy 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.

All Comments Share Story Report

88%
Goppy1 year, 1 month ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

I like this story.

Right Wing Extremists ... especially here on Propeller, drop the word Socialism at every opportunity. To me, what this says is that they have absolutely no idea what Socialism means.

When John McCain ran for President, he gave as one of his motivators, this concept: 'Sacrificing one's own selfish needs for the common good.' One could argue this is the foundation of Socialism.

Socialism is part of the warp and weft of our society. Our Military, our government ... they are true expressions of a kind of Socialism.

Government takes care of every aspect in the lives of our Soldiers, Veterans, Politicians ... and in large part, the wealthiest Americans.

Of course, it's the Modern Republican party is responsible for providing welfare to the wealthy.

Politicians vote themselves a national health care plan modeled on some of the most Socialistic programs from some of the most socialistic nations. But they ensure the REST of America do not participate.

The Common Good ... it's what our nation was founded on.

But over time, greed, self righteous aggression, and deceitfulness - have perverted the notion of the Common Good ... to an Morally Vacant, 'Every Man For Himself' mentality.

What has resulted is Fear, Paranoia, .... and more greed.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 2) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
52 Replies

loading ...
- iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user50 Replies
  - 86%
    gamahuche1 year, 1 month ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    "The only differences between the two parties are the two sets of lies they use to feed their flocks."
    
    That's a namby-pamby wishy-washy metaphor!
    Surely something more along the lines of rushing over cliffs and Gadarene swine would put more lead in the old pencil and give your point some get-up-and-go OOOMPH rather than have it trickle like a stale unspeakable emission into the recycling latrine for tired old outmoded cliches?
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    41 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user13 Replies
      - iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user10 Replies
        
        63%
        crespi1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        iatcnc-
        
        Calling the self-named NEOCONS who wanted to fuse Church and State with giant corporations "Liberal" is a severe misuse of terms.
        
        Liberals didn't kill gays on American city streets in the 1980's and 1990's but Conservative Christians DID.
        
        Liberals are generally AGAINST invasions of privacy like warrantless wire-tapping but NEOCONS are all FOR it.
        
        Liberals are AGAINST the death penalty but CONSERVATIVE pundits on FoxNews have said that illegal immigrants "should be shot."
        
        There are many more examples.
        
        Don't try revisionism denying how the Republican party was openly (and welcomingly) taken over by EXTREMIST ULTRA-CONSERVATIVES.
        
        They tried that on Fox a few years back and it was a lie then, too.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 6) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        9 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user8 Replies
        
        83%
        crespi1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Granted. The Neocons were not traditional conservatives. But to call them "liberals" is revisionism since they actively called for the destruction of the Democratic party.
        
        The Neocons were much closer to Hitler's fascists than to Communists in their goals and methods. That puts them on the conservative side of the spectrum.
        
        And what YOU did or do doesn't matter since Gingrich, Colter, Limbaugh, Bush, Bozell, Cheney, etc. appealed and connected to CONSERVATIVES in this country.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        80%
        ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I checked out the silverbear website, and it simply states what many of us have been shouting for the last 30 years. But why pretend that this is so recent in origin?
        I, personally won't be satisfied until heads roll for the mess that was created in the las 8 years. Granted it was already going on during the former three presidents, but this administration made it spiral downhill so much faster.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        4 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        50%
        slate1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Then to be fair, we need to reach back beyond 8 years and let heads rolls from both sides. A eft basket and a right one.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        3 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        100%
        ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Do you really think that the most serious of our current problems are not a result of this administration?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 10) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        50%
        ADAGUY1 year ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Worse yet, do you really think that most all of these problems could not have been avoided had Bush wanted to avoid them?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 10) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        Neutral
        slate1 year ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Do you not realize that all administrations are connected like a chain? The present inherits the things the former ignored or messed up. There were things Clinton could and should have done that could have helped prevent 9/11. Taken OBL when he was being offered, killing him when he actually had him in his sights. If 9/11 never happened then Bush would have never done much of what he did as it pertains to the war on terror.
        
        The Democrats demanded that banks loan money to those that could not afford it and with little or no evidence that they would pay it back Social engineering at it's worse was also a key factor ot what's goingn on with the market today.
        
        I'm certain that once Obama has difficulties with this market, you'll understand of what I say and gladly look back to the present administration to share the blame. As it should be in the real world.
        
        If Bush 'wanted' to avoid them? LOL you say that as if he wanted things to crumble! To what end would he be willing to do that?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        75%
        ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I just read your propeller profile. In your description of yourself, you mention wanting to get the liberals out of the republickin' party. Yet in your posts, you keep saying you are not a republickin'.
        Interesting!
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 8) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
      - blablablaComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
    - iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user26 Replies
      - 80%
        crespi1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        By the way, iat, you speak EXACTLY like a Neocon, with pointless insults and self-promoting immflamatory bile...
        
        How 'bout another round for the fans?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        18 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user17 Replies
        
        83%
        crespi1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Weak insult.
        
        Please try something more than the tired "communist" bit. That ran out of steam when the conservatives kept trying to smear Obama with it.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        15 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user14 Replies
        
        75%
        crespi1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        The Republicans have had 6 years of total control where anyone who dared question their disatrous policies were called "traitor" and "communist' by their ultra-conservative fanatics.
        
        Let's keep that in mind,
        
        I think Harry Reid is a Mormon creep, however.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        6 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user5 Replies
        
        78%
        crespi1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        What left-wing controlled media?
        
        Ultra-conservative mouthpiece for Bush FoxNews and it's many affiliates?
        
        CNN with it's anti-Obama subliminals and free rides for Palin and McCain for the last year?
        
        Or corporate conservative Republican owned network "news"?
        
        Olberman is the only newscaster (and now Maddow0 who dared to stand up to the neocon agenda and lies.
        
        The Republicans refered to THEMSELVES as conservatives since Reagan, whether or not it was true, so they made their own bed and bed to lie in it (as if their perpetual lies weren't enough.)
        
        Liberals can be just as bad but haven't had any power for some time and this cannot be discounted.
        
        Let's get justice for the crimes of THIS administration first.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        4 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
        
        80%
        Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        If Murdoch, Disney, Westinghouse, etc (the primary owners of media) are
        left wingers it is a new phenomenon to suck up to their recent gains.
        MSNBC has a decided lean in the liberal direction but they also have Pat Buchanan, and Joe Scarborough.
        There are some differences in the parties, though perhaps not fiscally or in regards to collusion- lobbyists.
        But that is a dynamic process, and can/has changed over time.
        If you are a conservative as you claim, to you they are no different in the sense that neither in recent years has represented you.
        Democrats(in the modern era) have been far better in dealing with racial inequality, stewardship of the economy, and environmental issues.
        Are there nit wits in the party? sure.
        But generally there is a difference, though they may not be the differences your looking for.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 14) (recursion depth : 13) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        75%
        Dionys1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        "I can't believe that anyone could think that the media isn't controlled by the left wing."
        
        Since you mentioned logic in your post, perhaps you should apply some instead of posting knee-jerk reactionary right-wing propaganda.
        
        Take the far left view of any news story (call it socialist if you want), then take the far right view of any news story (call it fascist if you want). Then find the center between the two. Then look at where the coverage falls on that spectrum. It is *always* slightly right of center. Always.
        
        NBC is owned by GE and the Bin Laden group, for example. GE is one of the nation's biggest providers for military research, weaponry, equipment, et cetera. You can find similar corporate ties for every supposedly 'liberal' news media and if you think they're not pushing the corporate agenda that suits them best, you're either dumb or intentionally blind.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 14) (recursion depth : 13) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
        
        80%
        ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I recall you hitting on Obama numerous times. I really think that you are simply labeling all the republicans that have questionable voting records as "liberals" so you won't have to defend them.
        
        I too am a conservative, but if I am given a choice between continuing corruption, and liberalism, I'll have to take the liberalism.
        For this reason, I voted for Obama.
        So if you are not a republican, who did you vote for?
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        6 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user5 Replies
        
        80%
        ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        You don't even know any of my beliefs regarding politics, yet you know I'm not conservative?
        You are good if you can do that!
        Are you sure that you are not merely labeling those who disagree with you as "liberals"? That's certainly how it looks.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
        
        80%
        ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        So tell me all seeing all knowing great one, what are my views? After all, from your above post, you already know them.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        2 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
        
        100%
        ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        "Maybe your a closet liberal or something? I don't know, "
        There for a minute, you had me thinking that you knew all about me.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 14) (recursion depth : 13) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        75%
        StevieGee1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        There is no such thing as a communist neo-con.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
      - 83%
        Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        iatc, I was buying your notion that that the republicans are not conservatives, a point I agree with. But they are NOT liberals, merely self serving corporatists and imperialists. Any legitimacy to your posting disappeared with your attack on Crespi. It deteriorated into mindless masterb***** and worthless insults.
        
        Liberalism by definition is a willingness to seek new solutions to problems, conservatism seeks to preserve existing social strata and institutions.
        neither are inherently right, wrong, or particularly evil... at least until they are used as banners to propagate totalitarianism, fascist or communist.
        Capitalism-Communism all the same in the end, power is centralized and greedy individuals usurp it for their own gain.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        6 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user5 Replies
        
        100%
        ForrestPhelps1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        To iatcnc:
        
        I think what I'm hearing from you is that you don't want to be called a Republican, or a neocon, or lumped in with them.
        
        Fine, so start a dialogue to explain your beliefs and positions and don't lump others into labels that don't fit. (Not all liberals are fiscally irresponsible).
        
        Yes, others attack you. Ignore it. Talk to the issues.
        
        Yes, sometimes you'll be mad and attack anyhow. Apologize and move on.
        
        I, for one, am a liberal that loves to find out how others who don't share my beliefs come to their conclusions.
        
        Have a good Thanksgiving.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        4 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
        
        83%
        ADAGUY1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        I agree with a lot of what you say about the republican party and the democrat party, the thing that throws me off is when you start bragging on Reagan. I just don't get it. When he ran the first time, in 1976, I liked him and I backed him 100% But when he returned in 1980, he had aligned himself with Nixon cronies, and I knew right then that he was bad medicine.
        His "trickle down" policies were a farce, and it became obvious by this first term. He was promising to balance the budget, and be a one term president. But he bought every politician he needed, and ran the debt up in doing so. When he left, we were worse off than when he started. I believe that you weren't old enough to really pay attention to what was going on in the world at that time.
        Take time to read this, and then brag on him.
        
        http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/xfile1.html
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 10) (recursion depth : 9) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        2 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
        
        100%
        ADAGUY1 year ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        You just don't seem to understand that the president is the most powerful man in the US. Go back and look at how much the debt went up in the first 4 years he was in office. Now take a look at how many times he vetoed a spending bill only to have it overridden by the house and senate. (damn few)
        If you think the out of control spending was due to congress, you are half right. But half of the blame lies directly on the shoulders on Reagan.
        During his first year or so in office, he needed to get a bill through the house and senate, but was having trouble getting the votes. So he called many senators and congressmen and offered them favors, with government money. One such senator was Sam Nunn from Georgia.
        Reagan told Nunn that if he would vote for the bill Reagan was trying to get through, that he (Reagan) would allow him to tie a rider on this bill raising the federal price support on peanuts.
        Nunn voted for the bill, the price support for peanuts went up. Now, guess who paid for that price support increase. YOU DID!
        This is only one example, I'm sure there are thousands more just like it. Yet you call him "conservative". Somehow, you will find a way to defend this, but if a member of the democrat party does the same thing, you will blame the problem on "liberalism".
        Frankly, you don't know what in the hell you are talking about.
        Reagan baffled you with bull$hit, and you still have not gotten over it!
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 12) (recursion depth : 11) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
  - 100%
    Natureboy1 year, 1 month ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    "The republican party was taken over by liberals since the first Bush administration. "
    
    I think the habit of expressing in conservative-liberal, Democrat-Republican dualisms tends to handicap our discourse.
    
    It is fairer, IMO to say that the democrat and republican parties have both been taken over by corporatists, and that the values of both conservatism and liberalism are betrayed daily in Washington DC.
    
    Hence the fad of "bipartisanship." Beware of it. Bipartisan measures tend to be those measures which betray the common agenda of the apparent duopoly.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    1 Reply
    
    loading ...
    - 100%
      Radiofreeeuropa1 year, 1 month ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      Pilgrims-
      I'll bet the indigenous population regrets saving their sorry as**s!
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...
  - 88%
    StevieGee1 year, 1 month ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    iatcnc, ( a difficult name) You keep pointing out how liberal both Bushes, McCain and Guiliani are. Please don't do that anymore. I am a liberal and I have absolutely nothing in common with them. I am a social liberal. This means that I think that government has no place in my, or anyone else's, personal life. Fiscally, I'm somewhat conservative. This means that I believe that the government should refrain from deficit spending whenever possible. I also, however believe that government has a responsibility to take care of various services that are required such as defence, infrastructure, and education. Bush has done none of these things.
    When I read your posts, I think maybe you would be more happy as a Libritarian... or maybe you are... but please don't call Bush a liberal because he isn't.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    5 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - 80%
      wtagg1 year, 1 month ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      Your comment supports iatcnc's. You are not able to define yourself using a single term.
      
      I look at the terms conservative and liberal as being efficient and inefficient. There are many instances where something that may be perceived as liberal within the cultural collective truly isn't, by definition of the word. The same with conservatism.
      
      If you look how you have evaluated Bush, by your own benchmarks, he would be a liberal, by definition. The country has received less (well, actually a negative) return or equity on the our investment of Bush and his admin.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      0 Replies
      
      loading ...
    - iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
      - 100%
        StevieGee1 year, 1 month ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Don't give him to me. I don't want him.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        loading ...
        
        iatcncComment removed: Retracted by user
      - 100%
        ADAGUY1 year ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        "don't call Bush a conservative, he is anything but a conservative."
        Yet you probably voted for him both times he ran!
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
- 100%
  JimBland1 year, 1 month ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  As usual, a well thought-out, logical post Goppy. Keep up the good work
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  0 Replies
  
  loading ...

Post Reply

You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.

People Who Liked This Comment (22)

People Who Didn't Like This Comment (3)

Submit a Story

Advertisement