April 8, 200917 yr Norman Mattoon Thomas (November 20, 1884 - December 19, 1968) was a leading American socialist, pacifist, and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America. As a candidate for President of the U. S., Norman Thomas said, in a 1944 epoch speech: "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism", they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. ... I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform." Interesting.
April 8, 200917 yr Can't blame me! I'm a registered Independent. :popcorn: Oh shush you borderline Bolshevik! :lol:
April 8, 200917 yr Norman Mattoon Thomas (November 20, 1884 - December 19, 1968) was a leading American socialist, pacifist, and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America. As a candidate for President of the U. S., Norman Thomas said, in a 1944 epoch speech: "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism", they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. ... I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform." Interesting. Do you have a link to the speech? I'd like to hear his logic. And why he continued to be a socialist party member if his ends were being accomplished by a major party.
April 8, 200917 yr Oh shush you borderline Bolshevik! :lol: You be quiet, or it's a Pogrom for you, Comrade!
April 8, 200917 yr A week or so ago, I cited specific examples of how the implementation of the current bailout plan is evidence of the classical definition of socialism, i.e., government control of the means of production. I was wondering whether anyone really disputes or takes issue with that evidence.
April 8, 200917 yr I was waiting for the resolution of this quote: I have no definitive proof to offer as of yet, but my understanding is that almost all of these conditions were applied retroactively under an omnibus clause for unilateral "future modification." I couldn't find what you were referencing and it's a bit difficult to have a discussion if we aren't looking at the same information.
April 9, 200917 yr I was waiting for the resolution of this quote: I couldn't find what you were referencing and it's a bit difficult to have a discussion if we aren't looking at the same information. If you were a lawyer, you would say "we are requesting that you supplement your answers to interrogatories.":lol: Let me see what I can find.
April 9, 200917 yr "You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anyone anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." Dr. Adrian Rogers 1931
April 9, 200917 yr Author Do you have a link to the speech? I'd like to hear his logic. And why he continued to be a socialist party member if his ends were being accomplished by a major party. No. I tried to find a link to the whole speech, but can't...yet. All I can find is this excerpt.
April 9, 200917 yr A reprint of this article appeared in the Courier-Journal not too long ago. I was going to give it its own thread, but forgot to. I don't really have an opinion one way or another, but I think it's pertinent to this discussion. Obama's no Socialist: I should know
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.