Stalinism The term implies an inherently oppressive system of extensive government, employment of extrajudicial punishment(sounds famliar), and political "purging", or elimination of political opponents(fairness doctorine, card check) and it involves a "state using extensive use of propaganda to establish a personality cult around an absolute dictator(OBAMA)" to maintain control over the nation's people and to maintain political control for the Party.


Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist ideology that aims to create a single-party state with a government led by a dictator who seeks national unity and development by "requiring" individuals to subordinate self-interest to the "collective interest" of the nation.

WAKE UP!!!!!

The February 17th, 2009, episode of Jeopardy
Alex Trebek

For $200
"A Marxist stage before communism which is characterized by government control over the economy....

no one even attempted to answer.

Then Alex says, "Ooohhh, what is socialism? We were going for socialism.

we aren't just "slouching toward" we're on a well waxed sled going down a steep hill...hope you wore your helmets, the crash is going to hurt...


The Bank of England and No.10 at war: We can't afford Budget spending spree, Governor tells Brown By Sam Fleming and Benedict Brogan
Last updated at 8:35 AM on 25th March 2009


The Governor of the Bank of England stunned Downing Street yesterday by warning against a giveaway Budget next month.
Mervyn King said public finance deficits were too high for big tax cuts or bumper spending increases on April 22.
The extraordinary warning to Gordon Brown not to blow billions on a second 'fiscal stimulus' came perilously close to breaching the convention that the head of the Bank does not question Government policy.

Mr King's intervention was especially embarrassing for the Prime Minister because it came as he was using a speech to the EU Parliament in Strasbourg to call for 'the biggest fiscal stimulus the world has ever seen'.
The governor's warning underlined mounting concerns - both inside and outside Government circles - about the scale of public borrowing.


I don't know why they just don't print a coupla fresh trillion...that's what we're doing...YES WE CAN!!!!

Spence, you're reached that point. Your responses no longer warrant a response.

and obviously is now the recipient of bad gramatical attacks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device-a device provided by team Obama and the socialist society of Amerika

lovers quarrel....:cheers:

Come on guys make up and fight some more :buds:

Why can't you respond to my response to your cut and paste? I call out your argument as complete BS stating facts as evidence and it doesn't warrant a response? Are you mad?

Either I'm wrong or I'm right.

Sounds like I may be right.

-spence

[QUOTE=spence;676370

Fairness is a personal thing. I perceive my taxes to be fair or unfair, but the Government couldn't really care less what I think.

-spence[/QUOTE]



And therein lies the problem-- Taxation without proper representation.

Yet when the economy bounces back and all these industries are making money again you won't want to raise taxes then either. Then it will be; "well, the economy is just getting going again you can't raise taxes now!" Then after things have been good for a while it'll be the same thing. Have you ever said that it would be a good time to raise taxes?

At what point would you say we have paid enough?????

The flip side of course is how little it not enough?

The tax cut mantra of conservatives gets pretty silly at times. Not all tax cuts are good, if that was the case we'd have zero Government revenues and anarchy would soon ensue.

So Buck, how much are you comfortable paying?

-spence

Here's a "tax fairness" question I like to hear some opinions on. The news today is full of municipal gov. employees either losing their jobs or taking unpaid furloughs due to local budgets in the red. The municpality where I work has already gone through a couple of rounds of cuts and there's really nothing left to cut but people. Residents have never passed a Prop.2 1/2 override yet they still want their public safety, trash pick-up, roads plowed and repaired,small class sizes, etc. Do you feel it's right for a community to "balance the books" on the shoulders of municipal employees rather than have residents "pay their share" for the services they receive with a relatively small RE tax increase.?

It's a difficult question as there are really two issues here.

1) How to address short-term budgetary shortfalls
2) How to address long-term budgetary imbalance

You'd have to question if most communities are really very good at running a business.

-spence

Well lets see: I pay income tax, property tax, I just paid a 5% tax for my sons truck, a 5% tax on most goods I buy, excise tax on boats, cars and trucks. tax on the cell phones, tax on fuel, tax on cable. Fees, fees and more fees on my daughters state college education. Do you want me to go on Spence, or maybe like 50% of my income is enough.

I don't think I have ever heard anyone but you ask if maybe we don't pay enough....

We have passed several overrides in Mansfield. I was shocked when the last one failed.

the question should not be when have we been taxed to much, the question should be why are we SPENDING too much.

It's funny. Listing off the names of taxes is like listing off the names of all the plays a football team uses - Up the middle, off tackle, toss, sweep, trap, counter, go, post, flank, slant, hook, flat... a lot of the plays are very similar (just like many taxes are very similar in rate) but personnel resource allocation is adjusted (just as specific tax revenues are often allocated for specific purposes - think, gas tax for infrastructure).

You really do adhere to the "FoxNewsChannel School of getting a groundless point across", attempt to overwhelm your opponent with mundane facts then spin and manipulate those "facts" in an attempt to prove a weak point. Then there's also the aspect of never actually answering any question someone asks you but presenting the illusion you did - that must be taught in the advanced class.

I agree 100%. What need is there for Pelosi's government issued plane to be upgraded just so she can fly to San Francisco non-stop and why aren't there limits on the amount of travel she can do? Why do Congressmen need to travel to Israel to "survey the destruction?"

So you're comfortable paying 50%?

You didn't answer the question.

-spence

If you think the gas tax money is only spent on infrastucture then your misinformed. I think like 45% maybe goes there.

Spence,
Yes, if I thought that we needed 50% to cover the actual cost of what the government needed, then yes I would be OK with 50%.

But, No, I am not ok with 50%.
What I want to know is... are you ok with me spending 50%?

Of course he is. I'm sure he'd be ok with you spending 100%.

I don't watch Fox News so I don't know about its School or if it does what you say, but the method of overwhelming an opponent with "facts" (whether they are actually facts or not) then moving on, and not answering questions, even actually changing the subject when the questions are too much to the point . . . this method of argument has existed long before Fox News, or its School, existed. Actually, my liberal friends as well as liberal media commentators are quite adept at using the method.

I love that!!! You're right, he has figured out a way to reverse slavery!
Soon enough the light will turn on for the masses, when they too realize that we are all indeed slaves to Obama's tax man. To keep up his proposed spending if (God forbid) he has 8 years of it, he'll have to take 50% of all the wealth in the US in taxes, just to break even.

http://www.mathewyoung.com/RushLimbaugh.jpg

That's the Definition of "Drive By Media"

All Hail, Rush, Hannity, Beck, Levin and Savage!!

You are saying that they are not guilty of Drive by media.

if you hail those 4 and especially Savage, it is VERY telling about you there cool beans... new name for your boat... 'Right-wingnut :D:D'

And what's the consistent theme among all of these guys? They all rely on conflict to enrich their sponsors and in turn enrich themselves.

"Drive by media" is nothing more than a strawman catch phrase that Rush uses (quite expertly) to convince you he's right. What nobody pays attention to is that it's just a play on the old "shoot the messenger" aphorism.

-spence

I've always been curious about this one, "who are the hero's of liberalism?"

and I concede the point, Savage is a bit out there on a few things....

I don't know...FDR seems to be highly regarded.

But the numbers of people who would consider themselves a "liberal" is really very small in this country, perhaps well under 20%.

What's interesting is that typically 50+% of people will consider themselves to be "conservative". Does this mean that there are more conservatives? Not really...everything from evangelicals to libertarians are lumped together as "conservatives" even though they often share few values.

The words liberal and conservative are just ends of a spectrum. To apply them to real people isn't ever going to provide a realistic picture of what one believes.

-spence

and FDR is famous for what? taking a managable recession into a deep depression and dragging it out with huge government programs, and increased government spending. I believe a Reagan type approach in the time of FDR would have kept it a recession and never would have been a great depression.

There is pride in private sector success, which increases productivity. Depending on Uncle Sam to bail us all out, is silly. We need to knuckle down and work harder and if we fail, we get back up, and try again... Each time we fail, we learn and improve ourselves.
Failure is one of the steps we take on the road to success, few hit a home run their first time at bat.

Don't tell a Republican that though. To them, a liberal is any person who even slightly disagrees with them.

The word Conservative is a neutral term - neither insulting or complimenting. However, the Republican based has successfully coined the word liberal to be an insult, and as such, they throw it around every chance they can get.

Just watch any commentary on FoxNews, or any post on here by buckman.

The breadth of ignorance does amuse me though.

You must have been sleeping through history class. You're not serious are you?

It's funny how most (not all I agree, but most) have given praise to FDR for his handeling of the Depression for the past 50 years, yet it's not until we have another liberal President and a bad recession that had Reagan been in charge things would have cleaned themselves up right quick!

Sounds like revisionist history to me.

There's nothing in this statement that anyone, regardless of party of idiology is going to disagree with.

-spence

THE consistent theme is enriching themselves?? How terrible that one should use one's talent to enrich himself. So how do you feel about the rest of the media who make loads of money? Are they also part of THE consistent theme? Amazing how the most CONSISTENT criticism of the Limbaugh, Coulter, etc. crowd is that their in it for the money. Very little of actual engagement and debate about their IDEAS, which are, actually, their consistent theme.

I believe the old "shoot the messenger" aphorism refers to killing the bearer of BAD news not FALSE news. Rush's "Drive by Media", in his opinion, is full of strawmen, slander, and other untruths.

So why did the Bail Out Bill get passed? Most Americans opposed yet, the All Knowing, All Caring Obama and a Democrat Congress and Senate passed the stupid thing.

When we were already in over our head in debt, we take out a huge loan, so we can make it all better. Kinda like getting 5 new credit cards, because your Sears card is maxed out...

I just get frustrated with the way most in government think. If we ran our household like that, we'd go bankrupt and lose the house and the boat........

Is an "extreme conservative" extremely neutral?

Nope, neither is a true liberal or a conservative or a democrat or a republican.

I don't see your point.

Ya, forget about finding ways to cut your budget first, just spend your way out of debt. :rolleyes:

Economics 101.

You're taking my comment out of context. They're enriching themselves through conflict that's often ugly, hateful and at the expense of others.

Their ideas are simply a vehicle. They don't do what they do out of a sense of conservative altruism, they're entertainers for gods sake. It's about ego and dollars first and foremost.

-spence

There are plenty of fiscal conservatives in both parties, they are just not very influential or spineless.

-spence

That is dead wrong, again JD. You liberal you:btu:

Of those that I've listened to, Savage might be the closest to your description. To me, the others, especially Limbaugh, are engaging the "conflict" of ideas. I don't expect the selfessness of altruism to be a factor in such a conflict (debate?). Everything your are and believe should be employed. To me, they seem to take their ideas seriously, and, to me, much of the ideas make sense. Perhaps I'm naive or just lack your intuitive powers to know that their ideas are simply a vehicle and do what they do simply as: "entertainers . . .ego . . .dollars first and foremost." How do you know this, and why is it important? Entertainment makes truth more pallatable, ego is necessary, without the dollars there are no shows. But how does that diminish what they actually say and in what way does it prove that their ideas are not sincere?

BTW, I've seen more ugliness and hatefulness in these threads than heard on Limbaugh.