Unanimous: Obama Budget Defeated 414-0

JSG wrote: Yeah, like socialism is a BAD thing..

Count me in as a socialist and proud of it.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/What-i ... 0-619.html

Thank goodness for our constitution. People like you are little anomalies, annoying and misguided (and selfish, resentful and always looking for a "mama" to hold your hand) but the one comforting fact about the way our country is governed, you'll never be able to get your way, see the light of day, this nation will never be a socialist nation.

It's really easy to be a socialist in a place where you know it will never happen.

People like me represent most of the world, bubba.

As for us not being a socialist nation, what to you call Medicaid, Social Security, libraries, the public school system, police and fire, and the National Forest Service?

Do you realize that the books in your local library are…FREE? That’s right, anyone, regardless of gender, race, or creed can just walk into this building, find a book, CD, DVD, or newspaper and read it for free! Who pays for this? We all do through backbreaking Socialist taxation. My town library even gives free meeting rooms to freeloaders who want gather and promote learning. How did we let our founding fathers let this socialist program slide by? What was Thomas Jefferson thinking when he helped to founded the Library of Congress

JSG wrote: Yeah, like socialism is a BAD thing..

Count me in as a socialist and proud of it.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/What-i ... 0-619.html

Shocker!

JSG wrote: People like me represent most of the world, bubba.

As for us not being a socialist nation, what to you call Medicaid, Social Security, libraries, the public school system, police and fire, and the National Forest Service?

Do you realize that the books in your local library are…FREE? That’s right, anyone, regardless of gender, race, or creed can just walk into this building, find a book, CD, DVD, or newspaper and read it for free! Who pays for this? We all do through backbreaking Socialist taxation. My town library even gives free meeting rooms to freeloaders who want gather and promote learning. How did we let our founding fathers let this socialist program slide by? What was Thomas Jefferson thinking when he helped to founded the Library of Congress

A library does not represent the classic or political concept of true socialism. Our founding fathers were thinking it would be nice if everyone could read. Try it sometime.

"The Pew Research Center released a study in December showing that more Americans age 18 to 29 have a favorable view of socialism over capitalism. In fact, this demographic has a net positive view of socialism (49 percent positive to 43 percent negative) and net negative view of capitalism (46 percent positive and 47 percent negative). When Pew released an earlier version of the same study two years ago, this demographic's views on socialism were exactly the opposite (43 percent positive and 49 percent negative)."

http://www.freedompolitics.com/news/soc ... llege.html

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: A library does not represent the classic or political concept of true socialism. Our founding fathers were thinking it would be nice if everyone could read.

Whatever. It's paid for by taxpayers for the good of everyone (as you were so kind to point out) and it's available free to everyone, regardless of race, or nationality. Heck, even illegal aliens can use our libraries. If you don't believe that's socialism, you're daft.

JSG wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: A library does not represent the classic or political concept of true socialism. Our founding fathers were thinking it would be nice if everyone could read.

Whatever. It's paid for by taxpayers for the good of everyone (as you were so kind to point out) and it's available free to everyone, regardless of race, or nationality. Heck, even illegal aliens can use our libraries. If you don't believe that's socialism, you're daft.

"A socialist economic system would consist of an organisation of production to directly satisfy economic demands and human needs, so that goods and services would be produced directly for use instead of for private profit driven by the accumulation of capital, and accounting would be based on physical quantities, a common physical magnitude, or a direct measure of labour-time.[5][6] Distribution of output would be based on the principle of individual contribution."

That's socialism. If that's what you think we got, or if that's the future you want, fine... that's why our Republic was set up the way it was... to prevent folks like you from ever installing this kind of system in this country. If you self-identify as a socialist, then you've got to get with the program. The social safety nets we have in this country are NOT representative of the reality of actual socialism. You're playing in the shallow end of the pool and you seem to have no idea what you are really advocating... or you do and you're intentionally being obtuse.

If you truly are a socialist then you would be fully onboard with the above model. Are you?

So THAT's socialism.

By that British or Canadian definition*, Obamacare is not socialism. Thank you.

*from the spelling of labour

JSG wrote: So THAT's socialism.

By that British or Canadian definition*, Obamacare is not socialism. Thank you.

*from the spelling of labour

We will try the question again "If you truly are a socialist then you would be fully onboard with the above model. Are you?" And I don't need the literary critique as a deflection.

Thank you TLGOPT for proving so nicely that Obama, and the democrats, (and Obamacare) are not socialists.