Wednesday, May 13, 2009

WHAT WOULD YOU CALL A PERSON WHO SAID:

"America is...uh, is no longer...uh, what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, 'I don't want that future for my children.'"

"I choose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students, the Marxist professors and structural feminists."

"We can't drive our SUVs as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times and then just expect that other countries are going to say, "OK."

(Writer's aside: Is there someone who CARES what other countries are going to say?)

"We've got to make sure that people who have more money help the people who have less money. If you had a whole pizza and your friend had no pizza, would you give him a slice?"

"What is more important is to find the means by which we can redistribute our economic gains to the benefit of all. This is the government's obligation."

"In Washington they call this the 'ownership society,' but what it really means is 'you're on your own.' It's time for us to change America."

"One of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied as long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves."

Those statements were all made by Barack H. Obama.

I would call him a Socialist.

He had good company in his companion and wife:

"The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a re-vamped education system, someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more." (Michelle Obama)

Socialism: A system in which the government (not people like you and I) own all the major factories, farms, offices and other means of economic production.

Was it or was it not President BO who took the CEO-ship of General Motors?

Was it or was it not President BO who forced Chrysler into bankruptcy?

Is the government or is the government not expanding its control of economic institutions in the United States?

Is this or is this not the further development of Socialism in our country?

According to NewParty.org, a Socialist Party web site, October 1996, "Three N-P (New Party) members won Democratic primaries last spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House); Barack Obama, (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)."

It turns out that Barack Obama evidently was not only a member of this Socialist Party, but he evidently had actively courted them.

In the Marxist theory, Socialism is the temporary economic system to put into place as a prelude to Communism - where the government owns and controls everything.

"They'll train you so good, you'll start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that..." (Communist, Frank Marshall Davis - Barack Obama's mentor)

"We cannot expect the Americans to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can aid their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have Communism." (Nikita Khrushchev - former Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party)

"Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction." (Former President Ronald Reagan)

Do you have ANY quesions?

13 comments:

TAO said...

Gee, at one time I thought I was pretty knowledgeable about Marxism but lately I realize that I really didn't know a thing at all about his theory.

Never thought that socialism would be used to bailout and prop up corporations!

Joe said...

TAO: I think you ARE pretty knowledgeable about Marxism. I never doubted it for a moment.

I never thought so, either.

If I thought you would have accepted the challenge, I would have asked you to write an article for me all about Marxism.

TAO said...

I would write you an article about Marxism but you wouldn't like it because Karl Marx believed that economies develop and grow, they evolve from one system (feudalism evolves in capitalism and capitalism evolves into socialism...

To Marx, change does not occur by revolution but rather by evolution...and he appears to be right! His only mistake was the argument about the workers uniting against the owners of the means of production.

It appears today that the workers are against the evolution while and the owners of the means of production are clamoring for the evolution...

I just got back from a business meeting and heading to another one today, and the talk of business owners is they want bailouts and they demand the government do something to help them but they do not want the government to own them....

If the meeting today goes along the lines of "wanting to eat our cake and have it too.." then I am coming home early. I would love to debate them about their socialist tendencies but I have better things to do....

Joe said...

"To Marx, change does not occur by revolution but rather by evolution..."

I certainly agree with that. However I do NOT see the evolution as inevitable.

Nor do I see Socialism, Marxism, or Communism as desirable governmental systems.

I rather like the ideas of a democratic republic or a representative democracy.

If I had my "druthers" we would move away from this march toward Socialism and return to our roots.

Is that possible? Maybe not. But you can't blame a guy for trying.

Or can you?

Joe said...

TAO: Oh, and I think I acknowledged the evolutionary nature of the march in the quote by Nikita Khrushchev.

KrisEveland said...

To spot a socialist/marxist, just listen to what they say. Good post.

shoprat said...

Actually Socialism inevitably and inescapably devolves into a Neo-feudalistic economy. When ever the government is in control a feudal-like economy is inevitable. Obama's friends will be the feudal lords and we will be the serfs.

TAO said...

Communism, capitalism, and socialism are economic systems NOT political systems.

Democracy, kingdoms, and Totalitarianism are forms of government.

Soviet Russia was not a communistic economy nor was it a democratic state...it was a totalitarian government ruling over a fuedalistic economic system (and that was on a good day!)

China is a totaltarian capitalistic system...or on the verge of being so.

Europe is mostly democratic and socialist.

America hasn't been capitalistic in a long time and it has nothing to do with our government but rather with the concept of 'too big to fail."

The reason we have anti trust laws is to keep economic interests from forming monopolies and dominating our economic, political, and social systems.

Over the last 20 years we have lost sight of the strangling effect that bigness has on our economic system. Our political system serves the big economic interests...not the people.

Its called an oligarchy and now we find ourselves stuck between a rock and a hard place...

Obama is no socialist because so far everything he is doing is geared to bring stability to our existing economic system; to the entrenched interests....he is not changing the status quo.

Our small community and regional banks are healthy but he is bailing out the big boys and doing nothing to undermine them or threaten their position.

The firing of the CEO of GM...get real, the man had no clue what he was doing, and GM will end up in bankruptcy, the unions will get screwed, and in 10 or 20 years GM should be able to prosper.

The whole deal with Crysler is basically bringing in new managmement. Heck, they had a guy who got fired from Home Depot running that company...what does he know about automobiles...at least Fiat may have a clue.

As far as being serfs...we have been serfs to our economic system for way too long.

Joe said...

TAO: See, I told you that you should write my post for me.

Turns out you did.

Is it your opinion that people join Socialist organizations for the fellowship? Or is it usually because they agree with the organization?

My source for President BO being a member of the New Party was their own membership list.

Just as I would never join an organization promoting atheism, but choose to join a church, with which I agree, so Obama joined a socialist organazation instead of the chamber of commerce.

My definition of Socialism was taken straight from the dictionary, Wikipedia and some other online site whose name I can't remember as I write this.

How about him choosing Marxist professors as friends?

Most of my local friends are at least in the same game as I am, even if we're on different fields.

Do not his "share the wealth" ideas reek of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need?"

What about the quotes from his own mouth?

They sound very "don't worry, we're going to take over and handle everything" to me.

I think he is a Socialist.

You have failed to convince me otherwise...though I would be very happy if you could, 'cause I don't want a Socialist system or government or economy.

Joe said...

To All: I can hardly wait to see TAO and Ration Al's reactions to tomorrow's post.

Ten-to-one they'll draw conclusions from it that it does not say.

TAO said...

You focus on words and not actions...I focus on on actions and not words when it comes to politicans.

That's why you cannot see anything useful in what Obama does and still want to believe that Bush had some redeemable qualities.

Mark said...

I could comment on many points here, but I'll just comment on two:

Re: "(Writer's aside: Is there someone who CARES what other countries are going to say?)

"We've got to make sure that people who have more money help the people who have less money. If you had a whole pizza and your friend had no pizza, would you give him a slice?
"

1. Liberals do.

2. Yes, but if I do, it is my choice. If a third party came up and took my Pizza, and then gave it to my friend without asking me first, it might well start a fight.

That is the difference between charity and Socialism.

Joe said...

mark: "...it is my choice..." EXACTLY!!