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.
Well based on this statement you seem to recognize certain commonalities shared between the communists and democrats that does not exist with republicans, yet still fail to understand the obvious and unavoidable conclusions of this direct association.
There is no such thing as "reflexive logic", so you'd be correct that it doesn't apply. But if you should mean to insinuate that there is no syllogism involved in this case, then I would reject that not applicable at all. This particular matter deals with "associative logic" and "assumptive reasoning", and obviously there is a lack or failure to understand the concept and criteria of that form of logic on your part. Given that this is one of the primary forms of common logical deduction, you should be familiar with it, even if you don't know what to call it.
It is true that one can only be called a "communist", if they are a member of a communist party ... but that is simply a technicality, of course. The fact is, if there is congruency between the policies of Obama and his democrat radicals and the communists and socialists who support him, that would indicate that he must be, by direct association, sympathetic to the policy goals of communism, even if he doesn't carry a membership card in his wallet, or self identify as a communist. But aside that technicality, for all practical purposes, he is a communist since he does promote and implement the policies of communism. There is a direct association, and therefore quite accurate to say that Obama and the democrats are communist proxies or communist sympathizers. We're only dealing with semantics at this point.
That's not really a response, now is it?
No, David, it's not funny at all ... as I tried to explain to the other poster. It's actually quite sad. You see, David, if I were going to pick your pocket, rest assured I would try to do it without your being aware of my activities and intentions ... doesn't that make sense? Surely I wouldn't tell you to hold still, so I can pluck your wallet out of your pocket with ease. And that's kinda how psychological manipulation works too. The manipulator finds it to be far easier and considerably more effective if the person being manipulated is not aware of the manipulation. And that is what "indoctrination" is. The actual definition of "indoctrination" is the act of teaching a person to accept a particular belief or belief system uncritically ... i.e. without actually thinking.
By that measure, you most certainly are showing all of the symptoms of indoctrination, clearly demonstrated by believing that a person can promote, embrace, accept and agree with communistic goals and policies and ways of structuring society whilst not actually being a communist. You cannot be thinking and believing that nonsense simultaneously. It's this part about accepting these beliefs "UNCRITICALLY" that has rendered you oblivious to this indoctrination.
Wow, what a post. I am not allowed to rep you so will have to let this suffice.
That's why I prefer inductive reasoning, it tends to accurate more often in these types of situations. Of course, inductive reasoning would **** up the point you're trying to make, so probably best to avoid it.
Wait, I thought he was a socialist?
It's hard to keep up with all the lunacy your ilk spills, so you'll have to forgive me.
It wasn't much of a premise either.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
God, I love amateur psychoanalysis. That's rich.
Can you suggest why you don't see socialism a step from capitalism toward communism? That may make it easier to make out what you say about the isms.
The problem with your assumptive reasoning is its based on a fallacy so naturally your conclusion is false. Obama is not a communist. At best he is a plutocrat. Perhaps you should reflect on the old saying "actions speak louder than words". His actions have been to support the ruling plutocracy. As have been the actions of the last several presidents and congresses. Your, and the rest of the so called right's calling him a communist, marxist, muslim, etc., etc. makes you just as much a useful idiot to him as those college students. Sadly the repubs had a chance to nominate a candidate who proposed REAL change, but obviously weren't interested in changing anything.
I will bet that Obama doesn't carry a card like his most important mentor did, so he can't be a communist. How big a step toward communism is the law we call Obamacare? It has walked us a far piece toward it and by the time it is fully implemented will have us a far piece down that road. He did push pretty hard for that law all those months he wasn't concentrating on unemployment and the like, didn't he?
And thus you have perfectly described chritianity and the religion the R-W base runs on - Ironic no?
There is a thing called confirmation bias and both sides suffer from it. However, based on my observations, the Dems/Libs do tend to come over as more intelligent. I can make this distinction as I have no dog in the race other than wanting to see religion kicked out of US politics.
Another atheist making noise about getting rid of Christianity is heard from. You failed to include progressive with you words about Dems/libs. Do you not realize that progs have taken over the Democrat party? I wish you could have heard David Axelrod on Face the Nation this morning. It would have given you something else to think about to hear him today.
Those of us on the political left (I'm talking bout the real left, not The Democratic Party) have a set of poor choices from which to choose on election day. We can bypass the process, recognizing that "protest" votes are meaningless; we can stubbornly cling to our idealism and vote for a "leftist" candidate; or we can hold our noses and vote for the candidate who is fifteen degrees to the right of center instead of the candidate who is forty-five degrees to the right of center. Many do the latter, feeling as though maintaining the highly-imperfect status quo is preferable to finding themselves in a nation run by theologically-motivated right wing autocrats.
Of course, as usual for righties you pull a statement out of your behind with nothing to back it up. Just throw a dumb idea out there to see if it sticks - and it never does. Why is the right so shameless in this? Answer" because you got nothing else.
There are plenty of useful idiots out there including A. the tea party, B. middle class republicans, C. some seniors on social security. I would bet you have no clue about why I say this. Pathetic really.
Some advice for you:
* Wake up! Fox-type media is neither centrist nor traditional American!
* Liberals and Democrats are not "marxist" because Fox says so.
* Wall Street is full of the welfare queens you hate!
Use the brain God gave you, and try to let these simple truths sink in. It may hurt at first...
I say that what Sowell was talking about may have been what Rush Limbaugh called those who voted for Santa Claus Obama. Too many of them see him as just that and they make up a group of useful idiots, in my opinion. Too many of them see the freebies they can get, like the falsely mislabeled Obama phones, as really free. They don't understand that those things have to be paid for by someone and surely they don't understand who the someones are.
Those kids don't even have any idea who LBJ was. I bet that more than 90% of them don't have any idea how many Supreme Court justices we have. The same ones wouldn't know within 50 how many people sit in either house of Congress. That kind of stuff has been around in colleges for a very long time.
Of course it has. Free speech and all that. I thought conservatives were in favor of free speech.
Of course Reagan hated it. Students started yelling "Hell no we won't go" and he called in the cops to bash heads. Yep. No one loved free speech as much as Ronnie. Personally I think students have the right to yell whatever they want. Including chanting about Obama Phones for the clueless conservatives, lol. You either get it or you don't. A lot of conservatives don't. Unfortunately.
Cheering for "Marxism" ?
It takes a special kind of superior intellect to see the benefits of compulsory labor for the benefit of another... Of course, as long as those compelled are performing for YOUR BENEFIT...
Do they do that at Ole Miss these days? I thought that school had been forced to accept black people almost 60 years ago. Who was the one in the White HOuse back in the 1950s? Kidding yourself again, I see.
That was in 1962 because of a very brave man named James Meredith. It was during the Kennedy administration.
You were a history teacher? Really. And you don't know the date of a landmark moment in desegregation.
BTW: I WAS in East Berlin at the height of the Cold War. They were communists and it was an ugly place with a government that shot everyone who tried to escape over the wall or by swimming across the river. Saying otherwise is ridiculous. Lol, that's it for this thread. When someone claiming to be a history teacher says East Germany wasn't communist it looses validity quickly.
Last edited by DewDropInn; 11-11-2012 at 01:04 PM..
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.
