Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyone who thinks Obama is a socialist is most likely not somebody capable of having an intelligent political conversation, so this thread is kind of a waste of time.
I do agree with the original poster, and that's speaking as someone with a pretty far left perspective (as in, liberalism is a bad word to me) and as someone who has studied political theory at the doctoral level.
She's talking about how well read she is...since YOU brought it up to begin with. If you can't comprehend that, your argument that YOU are well read falls flat on its face.
The conversation was never about who is well read or who isn't. I asked her if she read the Communist Manifesto. This isn't a literature forum, this is a politics forum. Having 5 copies of the King James bible has no relevance to this conversation, unless if this is your source for political science information.
And I see that you also like to quip about typos. Must suck to have so little to talk about that one must pick out typos and such. I type fast and click send. Just the way it is and I am sorry that you are so immature as to have to pick on typos. There is something about progressives. It is a sad state of affairs when people can only debate about such trivial things as typos.
Either you can't debate or you are jealous. You can pick the one you like. I know the one I would pick for you.
You don't "quip" about spelling; a quip is something that you make. It wasn't a typo, it was plain old hot air. And you don't "debate" about typos, you point them out. Your syntax and grammar are garbled, using words in an inaccurate way. I wasn't debating and I'm far from jealous. I feel sorry for people who make claims that are disproven without the person ever grasping it. Obama isn't a socialist, btw.
The conversation was never about who is well read or who isn't. I asked her if she read the Communist Manifesto. This isn't a literature forum, this is a politics forum. Having 5 copies of the King James bible has no relevance to this conversation, unless if this is your source for political science information.
You are the one who started picking at her response and derailed the entire thread.
Soooo, I believe Obama is a socialist, or at least he has a lot of socialist leanings. He is still stuck up his banker buddies' butts, though, so I wouldn't say he's a die hard socialist or anything, but he does do a lot of things that would lead one to believe he does not believe in private industry and would like all people to have the same amount of money, lifestyle, etc. even if they do not work for it. That sounds pretty socialistic to me.
You don't "quip" about spelling; a quip is something that you make. It wasn't a typo, it was plain old hot air. And you don't "debate" about typos, you point them out. Your syntax and grammar are garbled, using words in an inaccurate way. I wasn't debating and I'm far from jealous. I feel sorry for people who make claims that are disproven without the person ever grasping it. Obama isn't a socialist, btw.
ANYWAY. Can we stop with the petty personal attacks on this particular poster now? It's one thing to make a snarky remark but it's another to engage in picking on one person for an entire thread when it has nothing to do with the topic at hand!
You are the one who started picking at her response and derailed the entire thread.
Soooo, I believe Obama is a socialist, or at least he has a lot of socialist leanings. He is still stuck up his banker buddies' butts, though, so I wouldn't say he's a die hard socialist or anything, but he does do a lot of things that would lead one to believe he does not believe in private industry and would like all people to have the same amount of money, lifestyle, etc. even if they do not work for it. That sounds pretty socialistic to me.
So asking someone to explain the difference between Marxism and Socialism is derailing a thread, when the thread is about Socialists? Asking someone if they read any of Marx's works is derailing? OK. I suggest you look up derailing. While you are at it, look up Socialism and Marxism
I'm just going to assume that you are not going to answer any of the above questions.
ANYWAY. Can we stop with the petty personal attacks on this particular poster now? It's one thing to make a snarky remark but it's another to engage in picking on one person for an entire thread when it has nothing to do with the topic at hand!
A critique of a post is a far cry from a personal attack, nor is it "snarky." The veracity of the OP has everything to do with whether or not the subject is relevant, which is why wise posters add a reliable link or three when they start threads, and posters use them to make a point or add to a discussion. It would be naive to blindly accept every assertion made on a public forum. President Obama is not a socialist, nor are the vast majority of those who voted for him. Let the poster provide a link from a credible source that he is, after he/she explains the difference between Marxism and socialism. How are they different from Communism?
You are the one who started picking at her response and derailed the entire thread.
Soooo, I believe Obama is a socialist, or at least he has a lot of socialist leanings. He is still stuck up his banker buddies' butts, though, so I wouldn't say he's a die hard socialist or anything, but he does do a lot of things that would lead one to believe he does not believe in private industry and would like all people to have the same amount of money, lifestyle, etc. even if they do not work for it. That sounds pretty socialistic to me.
So Obama is stuck up banker buddies' butts, but at the same time, he wants everyone to have the same amount of money and does not believe in private industry, which "sounds pretty socialistic" to you. The contradictions are immediately obvious.
So Obama is stuck up banker buddies' butts, but at the same time, he wants everyone to have the same amount of money and does not believe in private industry, which "sounds pretty socialistic" to you. The contradictions are immediately obvious.
He's a Corporatist Socialist. Big business Socialist. You want proof, here it is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you can't comprehend that, your argument that YOU are well read falls flat on its face.
