+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 42

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    457

    Obama says he is a socialist

    In his own words-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owA2geM8OGg&NR=1

    If you're not convinced then look at what Michelle has to say, “The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”

    What she means is Obama will "TAKE a piece of your pie".

    Must read-

    http://obamaism.blogspot.com/


  2. #2

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smith View Post
    In his own words-

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owA2geM8OGg&NR=1

    If you're not convinced then look at what Michelle has to say, “The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”

    What she means is Obama will "TAKE a piece of your pie".

    Must read-

    http://obamaism.blogspot.com/

    I thought that he already had to the tune of 450 million dollars.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    995

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    At one point in time I was a die hard capitalist. Let the markets be, they'll take care of themselves.

    In relatively recent times it has become PAINFULLY clear that the corporate sector is not able to regulate itself. They have proven this time and time again.

    In other words...the market should not be as free as it has been. So...is a light form of socialism really that bad? I'm not so sure any more. I know we can't trust any corporate executives to do the right thing by us.
    "Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid."
    -John Wayne

  4. #4

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    you need to think about what you are saying

    Socialism, NEVER works.

    Capitalism is what made our country great

    With Socalism, mild , medium, or hot, YOU LOSE FREEDOMS!

    Do you have any idea what Obama really believes and why?

    if the free markets were left to operate without interference from groups like ACORN and Obama, the housing markets would not be in the shape we are in now


    If there was no FED to manipulate rates, loose money would not have been available to be grabbed by the ACORNS of the world

    Dont give up one inch to Socialism, and currupt politicians like Obama, or we may never recover

  5. #5
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by brucefan View Post
    you need to think about what you are saying

    Socialism, NEVER works.

    Capitalism is what made our country great

    With Socalism, mild , medium, or hot, YOU LOSE FREEDOMS!

    Do you have any idea what Obama really believes and why?

    if the free markets were left to operate without interference from groups like ACORN and Obama, the housing markets would not be in the shape we are in now


    If there was no FED to manipulate rates, loose money would not have been available to be grabbed by the ACORNS of the world

    Dont give up one inch to Socialism, and currupt politicians like Obama, or we may never recover
    Yeah... cause Bush's capitalist nation hasn't taken any freedoms away, right?

    *cough* Patriot act *cough*
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  6. #6

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    Yeah... cause Bush's capitalist nation hasn't taken any freedoms away, right?

    *cough* Patriot act *cough*

    your right, I agree. Thats why I supported Ron Paul

    However none of these issues are relevent when we are faced with a guy like Obama. I am too scared to vote for the candidate I believe in, Bob Barr, because I know Obama will drag us to depths we may never recover from

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    459

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post
    Yeah... cause Bush's capitalist nation hasn't taken any freedoms away, right?

    *cough* Patriot act *cough*
    Patriot act is a security act that also deals with monetary problems when appropriate.

    Ask yourself this question.

    Hare We Been Safer Under Bush? The Empirical Evidence Says Yes

    By JOHN HINDERAKER | Posted Wednesday, May 28, 2008 4:30PM PT

    The debate over Iraq and the war on terror rages, even amid signs we're winning. John Hinderaker of powerlineblog.com recently posted a blog entry answering the perennial question, "Are We Safer?" We rerun it here with his permission.

    On the stump, Barack Obama usually concludes his comments on Iraq by saying, "and it hasn't made us safer."

    It is an article of faith on the left that nothing the Bush administration has done has enhanced our security, and, on the contrary, its various alleged blunders have only contributed to the number of jihadists who want to attack us.

    Empirically, however, it seems beyond dispute that something has made us safer since 2001. Over the course of the Bush administration, successful attacks on the U.S. and its interests overseas have dwindled to virtually nothing.

    Some perspective here is required. While most Americans may not have been paying attention, a considerable number of terrorist attacks on America and American interests abroad were launched from the 1980s forward, too many of which were successful.

    What follows is a partial history:

    1988

    February: Marine Corps Lt. Colonel Higgens, chief of the United Nations Truce Force, was kidnapped and murdered by Hezbollah.

    December: Pan Am flight 103 from London to New York was blown up over Scotland, killing 270 people, including 35 from Syracuse University and a number of American military personnel.

    1991

    November: American University in Beirut bombed.

    1993

    January: A Pakistani terrorist opened fire outside CIA headquarters, killing two agents and wounding three.

    February: World Trade Center bombed, killing six and injuring more than 1,000.

    1995

    January: Operation Bojinka, Osama bin Laden's plan to blow up 12 airliners over the Pacific Ocean, discovered.

    November: Five Americans killed in attack on a U.S. Army office in Saudi Arabia.

    1996

    June: Truck bomb at Khobar Towers kills 19 American servicemen and injures 240.

    June: Terrorist opens fire at top of Empire State Building, killing one.

    1997

    February: Palestinian opens fire at top of Empire State Building, killing one and wounding more than a dozen.

    November: Terrorists murder four American oil company employees in Pakistan.

    1998

    January: U.S. Embassy in Peru bombed.

    August: Simultaneous bomb attacks on U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killed more than 300 people and injured over 5,000.

    1999

    October: Egypt Air flight 990 crashed off the coast of Massachusetts, killing 100 Americans among the more than 200 on board; the pilot yelled "Allahu Akbar!" as he steered the airplane into the ocean.

    2000

    October: A suicide boat exploded next to the U.S.S. Cole, killing 17 American sailors and injuring 39.

    2001

    September: Terrorists with four hijacked airplanes kill about 3,000 Americans in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

    December: Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber," tries to blow up a transatlantic flight, but is stopped by passengers.

    The Sept. 11 attack was a propaganda triumph for al-Qaida, celebrated by a dismaying number of Muslims around the world. Everyone expected that it would draw more Muslims to bin Laden's cause and that more such attacks would follow.

    In fact, though, what happened was quite different: The pace of successful jihadist attacks against the U.S. slowed, decelerated further after the onset of the Iraq War, and has now dwindled to essentially zero.

    Here is the record:

    2002

    October: Diplomat Laurence Foley murdered in Jordan, in an operation planned, directed and financed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq, perhaps with the complicity of Saddam's government.

    2003

    May: Suicide bombers killed 10 Americans, and killed and wounded many others, at housing compounds for Westerners in Saudi Arabia.

    October: More bombings of U.S. housing compounds in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, killed 26 and injured 160.

    2004

    There were no successful attacks inside the U.S. or against American interests abroad.

    2005

    There were no successful attacks inside the U.S. or against American interests abroad.

    2006

    There were no successful attacks inside the U.S. or against American interests abroad.

    2007

    There were no successful attacks inside the U.S. or against American interests abroad.

    2008

    So far, there have been no successful attacks inside the U.S. or against American interests abroad.

    I have omitted from the above accounting a few "lone wolf" Islamic terrorist incidents, such as the Washington, D.C., snipers, the Egyptian who attacked the El Al counter in Los Angeles, and an incident or two when a Muslim driver steered his vehicle into a crowd.

    These are, in a sense, exceptions that prove the rule, since the lone wolves were not, as far as we know, in contact with international Islamic terrorist groups and therefore couldn't have been detected by surveillance of terrorist conversations or interrogations of al-Qaida leaders.

    It should also be noted that the decline in attacks on the U.S. was not the result of jihadists abandoning the field.

    Our government stopped a number of incipient attacks and broke up several terrorist cells, while Islamic terrorists continued to carry out successful attacks around the world, in England, Spain, Russia, Pakistan, Israel, Indonesia and elsewhere.

    There are a number of possible reasons why our government's actions after Sept. 11 may have made us safer.

    Overthrowing the Taliban and depriving al-Qaida of its training grounds in Afghanistan certainly impaired the effectiveness of that organization.

    Waterboarding three top al-Qaida leaders for a minute or so apiece may have given us the vital information we needed to head off plots in progress and to kill or apprehend three-quarters of al-Qaida's leadership.

    The National Security Agency's eavesdropping on international terrorist communications may have allowed us to identify and penetrate cells here in the U.S., as well as to identify and kill terrorists overseas.

    We may have penetrated al-Qaida's communications network, perhaps through the mysterious Naeem Noor Khan, whose laptop may have been the 21st century equivalent of the Enigma machine.

    Al-Qaida's announcement that Iraq is the central front in its war against the West, and its call for jihadis to find their way to Iraq to fight American troops, may have distracted the terrorists from attacks on the U.S.

    The fact that al-Qaida loyalists gathered in Iraq, where they have been neutralized by American and Iraqi troops, may have crippled their ability to attack elsewhere.

    The conduct of al-Qaida in Iraq, which revealed that it is an organization of sociopaths, not freedom fighters, may have destroyed its credibility in the Islamic world.

    The Bush administration's skillful diplomacy may have persuaded other nations to take stronger actions against their own domestic terrorists. (This certainly happened in Saudi Arabia, for whatever reason.)

    Our intelligence agencies may have gotten their act together after decades of failure. The Department of Homeland Security, despite its moments of obvious lameness, may not be as useless as many of us had thought.

    No doubt there are officials inside the Bush administration who could better allocate credit among these, and probably other, explanations of our success in preventing terrorist attacks.

    But based on the clear historical record, it is obvious that the Bush administration has done something since 2001 that has dramatically improved our security against such attacks.

    To fail to recognize this, and to rail against the Bush administration's security policies as failures or worse, is to sow the seeds of greatly increased susceptibility to terrorist attack in the next administration.

    Hinderaker blogs at http://powerlineblog.com

    http://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

    From Audacity of Hope: 'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.'

    http://www.terrorismawareness.org:80/know-about-jihad/

    For me that's about as clear as it gets.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Jreed View Post
    At one point in time I was a die hard capitalist. Let the markets be, they'll take care of themselves.

    In relatively recent times it has become PAINFULLY clear that the corporate sector is not able to regulate itself. They have proven this time and time again.

    In other words...the market should not be as free as it has been. So...is a light form of socialism really that bad? I'm not so sure any more. I know we can't trust any corporate executives to do the right thing by us.
    Here's where I disagree with you Jreed. The current financial crisis, despite what you may hear in the media, is rooted in socialist policies. It was the socialist approach of our government forcing lenders to extend credit to people who had no means to pay those loans back, that has us in this mess today. If the government would have stayed out of it, the free market lenders wouldn't have extended those loans in in the first place.

    Socialism is exactly what caused this crisis, and there is no getting around that. The government forced lenders like Fanny Mae to give bad loans out, and told them not to worry, because if they couldn't pay, they would come to the rescue. That created the very environment for executives like Franklin Raines to "cook the books" and make off with $90 million.

    There will always be corruption and greed among executives, but when those in the government becomes part of the executive staff, who will oversee them? As long as the government is not part of things, they can objectively oversee those executives, like they did in the Enron case. When they become involved in the executive making decisions, then they are paid big money to look the other way, just like Chris Dodd, Barack Obama, John Kerry and Barney Frank were in the case of Fanny and Freddy. Those executives from Enron were prosecuted because this was a free market enterprise, while you don't see the same thing happening in this Fanny and Freddy debacle, because many in the government were involved in the corruption.

    Democrats and the media like to blame this on the greed of executives, but couple of hundred million in bonuses is nothing compared to nearly trillion dollars in bad loans that the Clinton administration forced these financial institutions to take on.

    Free markets work... Socialism doesn't.
    Last edited by Grim17; 10-14-2008 at 10:57 AM.

  9. #9
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by nomass View Post
    Patriot act is a security act that also deals with monetary problems when appropriate.

    Ask yourself this question.

    Hare We Been Safer Under Bush? The Empirical Evidence Says Yes
    The question isn't about safety, the question is about freedoms.

    The problem presented with Socialism is with the freedoms being taken away.

    Bushes capitalist empire doesn't offer any more freedoms than any socialist empire - his Patriot Act made sure of it. Good or bad, the Patriot Act in one swoop took away every one of your rights and freedoms in the name of making you safe.

    Whether it works or not, you still have no freedom while it exists.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  10. #10
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    Here's where I disagree with you Jreed. The current financial crisis, despite what you may hear in the media, is rooted in socialist policies. It was the socialist approach of our government forcing lenders to extend credit to people who had no means to pay those loans back, that has us in this mess today. If the government would have stayed out of it, the free market lenders wouldn't have extended those loans in in the first place.
    Whoa.... Noone forced anyone to lend anyone money. It was capitalist greed that caused the problems. They wanted more money, so they took high risk loans, broke them up in small pieces and bundled the pieces in with low risk loans to make low risk packages.

    They sidestepped a law that was put in place to keep this kind of thing from happening. What they did wasn't really illegal, but they did it to get around a law. The only reason for that was that they wanted to make more money.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    Socialism is exactly what caused this crisis, and there is no getting around that. The government forced lenders like Fanny Mae to give bad loans out, and told them not to worry, because if they couldn't pay, they would come to the rescue. That created the very environment for executives like Franklin Raines to "cook the books" and make off with $90 million.
    If Fanny Mae doesn't want to give out a loan, Fanny Mae doesn't give out a loan. Nobody forced them do to anything. She did it cause she wanted to make the vast amount of money on a high risk/high yield fund that bit her in the butt.

    That's capitalist greed. How can you pin that on socialism?
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    There will always be corruption and greed among executives, but when those in the government becomes part of the executive staff, who will oversee them? As long as the government is not part of things, they can objectively oversee those executives, like they did in the Enron case. When they become involved in the executive making decisions, then they are paid big money to look the other way, just like Chris Dodd, Barack Obama, John Kerry and Barney Frank were in the case of Fanny and Freddy. Those executives from Enron were prosecuted because this was a free market enterprise, while you don't see the same thing happening in this Fanny and Freddy debacle, because many in the government were involved in the corruption.
    Here you are trying to pin that on socialism again... It was capitalism that allowed them to make those giant profits to steal.

    If it was socialism, they wouldn't have the money or the power to steal the money. They would be paid the same as everyone else and the government would control the company.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    Democrats and the media like to blame this on the greed of executives, but couple of hundred million in bonuses is nothing compared to nearly trillion dollars in bad loans that the Clinton administration forced these financial institutions to take on.

    Free markets work... Socialism doesn't.
    Nobody forced anyone to loan money? Where do you get that from? Seriously! If you don't want to loan money, then they don't do it. Have you never heard of people being turned down for a loan because of bad credit? That's them saying "No you are a high risk and we don't want to loan to you"

    People with high risk of defaulting have way higher interest rates. They are a high risk, but there's also a high return, which, once again, is capitalistic greed pushing them to loan the money against better judgement.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    457

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord_jag View Post

    Nobody forced anyone to loan money? Where do you get that from? Seriously! If you don't want to loan money, then they don't do it. Have you never heard of people being turned down for a loan because of bad credit? That's them saying "No you are a high risk and we don't want to loan to you"
    Not only did they force them to loan money (with anti-discrimination laws and harrassment lawsuits), but then Freddie and Fannie promised to buy the loans so they had little risk for complying. You are not paying attention.

    http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008...ake-bad-loans/

  12. #12
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Smith View Post
    Not only did they force them to loan money (with anti-discrimination laws and harrassment lawsuits), but then Freddie and Fannie promised to buy the loans so they had little risk for complying. You are not paying attention.

    http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008...ake-bad-loans/
    You can't "Discriminate" to poor people. You can only discriminate to minorities. That's what the lawsuits were about.

    They were being sued because they would give a white person credit where they wouldn't give others. They were forcing them to extend credit to good people who where non-white. That's not the same as forcing them to extend credit to people with low credit scores.

    The banks had every right to not give credit at all. The problems you speak of happened because they gave credit to all kinds of white people (with good or bad credit) while they wouldn't give credit to anyone non-white.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    9,583

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    What is wrong with a greater balance of wealth?

    That is the essence of socialism.

    Too much of an imbalance leads to jealousy, social ills, and crime.
    Every Saint has a past, every sinner has a future..

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    Here's where I disagree with you Jreed. The current financial crisis, despite what you may hear in the media, is rooted in socialist policies. It was the socialist approach of our government forcing lenders to extend credit to people who had no means to pay those loans back, that has us in this mess today. If the government would have stayed out of it, the free market lenders wouldn't have extended those loans in in the first place.
    There's far more to it than just a bunch of bad loans. Was it regulation that allowed the loans to be bundled into mortgage backed securities and get AAA investment-grade ratings based on obviously crappy models?

    Socialism is exactly what caused this crisis, and there is no getting around that. The government forced lenders like Fanny Mae to give bad loans out, and told them not to worry, because if they couldn't pay, they would come to the rescue. That created the very environment for executives like Franklin Raines to "cook the books" and make off with $90 million.
    Moral hazard didn't apply only to Fanny Mae. All the major banks were operating under the assumption that they wouldn't be allowed to collapse. And hey, they were right.

    There will always be corruption and greed among executives, but when those in the government becomes part of the executive staff, who will oversee them? As long as the government is not part of things, they can objectively oversee those executives, like they did in the Enron case. When they become involved in the executive making decisions, then they are paid big money to look the other way, just like Chris Dodd, Barack Obama, John Kerry and Barney Frank were in the case of Fanny and Freddy. Those executives from Enron were prosecuted because this was a free market enterprise, while you don't see the same thing happening in this Fanny and Freddy debacle, because many in the government were involved in the corruption.

    Democrats and the media like to blame this on the greed of executives, but couple of hundred million in bonuses is nothing compared to nearly trillion dollars in bad loans that the Clinton administration forced these financial institutions to take on.

    Free markets work... Socialism doesn't.
    Free markets work if there is perfect competition. There isn't perfect competition in the financial sector:

    - Individual companies can affect the market as a whole
    - Unregulated credit rating agencies meant that no one was able to properly assess an assest's worth, ie. there wasn't perfect information.
    - Moral hazard meant executives weren't behaving rationally

    I agree that socialism isn't the answer, but neither is laissez-faire economics. Government intervention is necessary if we want to avoid booms and busts, but it needs to be aimed at correcting the imbalances, not exacerbating them.

    It's not the question of free-market vs. socialism that everyone is trying to paint it as; there's a whole spectrum. Where the market doesn't meet the basic assumptions behind the "free market = effecient distribution of resources" concept then government regulation can lead to a fairer, more effecient market than if it were left to itself.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    SW United States
    Posts
    6,643

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by Yeah Well Fine Then View Post
    What is wrong with a greater balance of wealth?

    That is the essence of socialism.

    Too much of an imbalance leads to jealousy, social ills, and crime.
    What's wrong with it is, it destroys a society. It breeds complacency and takes peoples incentives away to achieve greater things. Capitalism is the reason America achieved greatness, and socialism is exactly why Russia and Cuba are social and financial disasters.

    Just keep your eye on Venezuela and you will soon see the next socialist disaster.

    Socialism has never worked in the history of the world, yet people like you still think it will.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,081

    Re: Obama says he is a socialist

    Quote Originally Posted by brucefan View Post
    you need to think about what you are saying

    Socialism, NEVER works.

    Capitalism is what made our country great

    With Socalism, mild , medium, or hot, YOU LOSE FREEDOMS!

    Do you have any idea what Obama really believes and why?

    if the free markets were left to operate without interference from groups like ACORN and Obama, the housing markets would not be in the shape we are in now


    If there was no FED to manipulate rates, loose money would not have been available to be grabbed by the ACORNS of the world

    Dont give up one inch to Socialism, and currupt politicians like Obama, or we may never recover
    I've tried posting a response to this about 3 times, so I'm just going to give shorthand. You're wrong, Socialism works, it works in the rest of the western world, where things don't suck quite as hard now. Without socialism this country would be a shit place to live, with low wages, no unemployment/injury benefits, and no regulations on food or anything else. Capitalism also got us into the Great Depression.

Similar Threads

  1. Obama the commie socialist? Fucking dumbasses.
    By willyjoe in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-22-2011, 04:22 PM
  2. 10 reasons why Obama is a socialist failure!
    By danrush1966 in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-18-2010, 12:32 PM
  3. Obama Socialist/Marxist Family Fraud timeline
    By Morpheus in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 06-17-2010, 12:47 PM
  4. Page 16 of Obama Socialist Health Control Plan
    By Morpheus in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-07-2009, 10:22 AM
  5. Obama is wrong on Socialist health care.....
    By Morpheus in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-25-2009, 11:41 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •