Health care, putting smart thermostats in your home, asking the GM boss to step down (in reality firing him), wanting more control over business, taxing people at 90%. It is disguised as something else, but he is not going to admit to government control. It is all done for the bettering of the country. What he is doing is no different than what the militarists of Japan, the Fascists of Italy and the Nazis in Germany did in the 1920's and 30's. A little here, a little there in the name of helping the little people, when in reality everyones freedoms are being whittled away.

 

All of this would have worked out if Bush had not started all this socialistic mess last fall. The ups and downs of the business world would have taken care of it all. Only utopian elitists think they can control the natural order of the world.

 

How is the President's healthcare plan "socialist?"

 

Congratulations, though, on getting "militarists" "fascists" and "Nazis" all into one post.

How is the President's healthcare plan "socialist?"

 

Congratulations, though, on getting "militarists" "fascists" and "Nazis" all into one post.

 

At first it may not be, but slowly step by step big brother will take over just as they have in Canada and Europe. They will ration health care, telling some it is too expensive to treat them or it is the end of the year and there is no money, they will have to come back at the beginning of a new fiscal year.

They will command people what they can or canot eat, they will order people to exercise. Step by step will will all be in lock step marching to the socialist drumbeat.

 

Thank you. They all are totalitarians.

At first it may not be, but slowly step by step big brother will take over just as they have in Canada and Europe. They will ration health care, telling some it is too expensive to treat them or it is the end of the year and there is no money, they will have to come back at the beginning of a new fiscal year.

They will command people what they can or canot eat, they will order people to exercise. Step by step will will all be in lock step marching to the socialist drumbeat.

 

Thank you. They all are totalitarians.

 

So you don't really have any proof that his plan is socialist. Its all just speculation, correct?

Health care, putting smart thermostats in your home, asking the GM boss to step down (in reality firing him), wanting more control over business, taxing people at 90%. It is disguised as something else, but he is not going to admit to government control. It is all done for the bettering of the country. What he is doing is no different than what the militarists of Japan, the Fascists of Italy and the Nazis in Germany did in the 1920's and 30's. A little here, a little there in the name of helping the little people, when in reality everyones freedoms are being whittled away.

 

All of this would have worked out if Bush had not started all this socialistic mess last fall. The ups and downs of the business world would have taken care of it all. Only utopian elitists think they can control the natural order of the world.

 

1) If GM is accepting bailout money, the government (aka taxpayers) have a right to have him step down, IMO.

2) If a company doesn't want to be controlled by the government, they're more than welcome to solve their problems without taxpayer support.

So you don't really have any proof that his plan is socialist. Its all just speculation, correct?

 

I don't care how you or anyone defines socialism Clyde. The simple fact that the way Leftist BHO and his cohorts are growing government by leaps and bounds, sticking their nose in private business and slowly taking away freedoms while preparing to tax certain individuals like Americans have never been taxed before...It is most definately headed in the "direction" of socialism. If you would rather not call it socialism because it doesn't fit the definition you have...Call it BAD! Call it wrong. Call it something. Call it anything but good.

I don't care how you or anyone defines socialism Clyde. The simple fact that the way Leftist BHO and his cohorts are growing government by leaps and bounds, sticking their nose in private business and slowly taking away freedoms while preparing to tax certain individuals like Americans have never been taxed before...It is most definately headed in the "direction" of socialism. If you would rather not call it socialism because it doesn't fit the definition you have...Call it BAD! Call it wrong. Call it something. Call it anything but good.

 

 

You first have to acknowledge that Obama did NOT start the intervention into private business. Call it bad, call it wrong, call it anything but all Obama's doing.

I don't care how you or anyone defines socialism Clyde. The simple fact that the way Leftist BHO and his cohorts are growing government by leaps and bounds, sticking their nose in private business and slowly taking away freedoms while preparing to tax certain individuals like Americans have never been taxed before...It is most definately headed in the "direction" of socialism. If you would rather not call it socialism because it doesn't fit the definition you have...Call it BAD! Call it wrong. Call it something. Call it anything but good.

 

Rolling back the Bush tax breaks is taxing "certain people" like they have never been taxed before?

1) If GM is accepting bailout money, the government (aka taxpayers) have a right to have him step down, IMO.

2) If a company doesn't want to be controlled by the government, they're more than welcome to solve their problems without taxpayer support.

I caught the tail end of a report today that some bank wanted to give back the money and tell the govt to kiss off but were apparently prevented from doing so. I'll keep my eyes out for details. If so, that is truly scary.

[/b]

I caught the tail end of a report today that some bank wanted to give back the money and tell the govt to kiss off but were apparently prevented from doing so. I'll keep my eyes out for details. If so, that is truly scary.

 

 

I haven't seen that. If you find anything, please link it. That would be interesting.

Rolling back the Bush tax breaks is taxing "certain people" like they have never been taxed before?

 

No, but if they were deemed "massive tax breaks for the rich" before, wouldn't you agree that they must now be "massive tax increases for the rich?"

No, but if they were deemed "massive tax breaks for the rich" before, wouldn't you agree that they must now be "massive tax increases for the rich?"

 

Sure. But to make it seem like they are the worst, most massive tax increases ever is inaccurate.

Sure. But to make it seem like they are the worst, most massive tax increases ever is inaccurate.

 

True, they're not even close.

I don't care how you or anyone defines socialism Clyde. The simple fact that the way Leftist BHO and his cohorts are growing government by leaps and bounds, sticking their nose in private business and slowly taking away freedoms while preparing to tax certain individuals like Americans have never been taxed before...It is most definately headed in the "direction" of socialism. If you would rather not call it socialism because it doesn't fit the definition you have...Call it BAD! Call it wrong. Call it something. Call it anything but good.

 

Debate policy all you want. Don't fall into the uneducated trap of terms like "socialism" "marxism" or "communism."

 

To your points: Do you believe the administration and the one before it should have let the big banks fail/go under?

 

Taxed like never before: Are you talking about the 90% on the AIG bonuses? Even the President has said that's not good policy.

 

What freedoms are being taken away?

You first have to acknowledge that Obama did NOT start the intervention into private business. Call it bad, call it wrong, call it anything but all Obama's doing.

 

Bush made me do it, Bush made me do it. What else is Bush making Oama do?

It is Obama's watch now. He is in charge, he can put a stop to it all, but he doesn't want to stop it. Bush did start it, but he is not President, Obama now signs or vetoes bills.

Bush made me do it, Bush made me do it. What else is Bush making Oama do?

It is Obama's watch now. He is in charge, he can put a stop to it all, but he doesn't want to stop it. Bush did start it, but he is not President, Obama now signs or vetoes bills.

 

No one said that Pres. Obama, or anyone, is blaming Pres. Bush. The point it that this is not something that started under Obama. He is responsible for all continuation of the plan, but the bailout did not originate with him.