1) The Democrats are not socialists. They're a long way right of centre.

2) Fascism and socialism are not opposites.

3) The Republicans are not fascists.

4) Refer to (1).

 

That is a pretty simplistic way of looking at things.

Reagan had an almost supernatural faith in the ability of unregulated capitalism to solve our problems. Unregulated capitalism benefits the rich, and those few with the talents and opportunities to become rich.

Most people benefit from a government that helps them get through life. Because most people know that, Republican efforts to reduce domestic spending always run into effective popular resistance as soon as Republican politicians get beyond the platitudes and generalities of campaign speeches, and become specific.

 

teabagger defined

teabagger

A whining fool shouting loudly for liberty but not willing to pay the bill.
After most American workers saw more money in their paycheck due to the lower tax rate, the teabaggers at Fox News railed against high taxes, but did not discuss how much Jesus hated hypocrisy...

2. n. Conservative activists who are so ignorant that they protest against tax cuts (that benefit them) by throwing tea into a river...

Conservative Republicans who protests against income taxes by rubbing their nutsacks in each other's faces...

1. A fascist right-wing conservative who opposes affordable healthcare by shouting at public gatherings.

2. A fascist conservative who protests living wages, affordable healthcare, and corporate accountability by dipping his nutsack into the mouth of another right-wing moron.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=teabagger

 

The starting point is ridiculous in an American context. Fascism is EUROPEAN ! WE invented it. Look. Heider in Austria, FASCIST, Estonia, FASCIST. Tea Parties are not Fascist. You Americans are Federalist or Anti-federalist (i.e. Liberals) Adams / Jefferson and then Andrew Jackson and the civil war, full stop.. Leave us with our shit. I know you had the Red Scare, the KKK and all, but the Commies is a German-Russian-French concept. Leave it to us. The division between right and left was made during the Revolution in France : the right was made of Parliamentary Monarchists and the Left of totalitarian Republicans (what was later known as the Terror). In the end, the Right won and we turned into an Empire and waged war to all those who disagreed with us. We got badly beaten at Waterloo and the Russian Tsar came in with that great idea : let's make an empire of christian monarchies !!!! So we French became the Russian's best friends; we gave them a bridge in Paris and loads of money for them to build their railways. The Industrial Revolution got started, the Germans became the master of the World, rose against their Austrian leaders, consituted a nation, then a Reich. Marx exiled to London, read about poverty in Charles Dickens' book and because he was against the German Power, the French implemented his views during the blockade of Paris in 1870 (The "Commune"). The Germans kicked our butts once in 1870, twice in 1918 and three times in 1940 and there was little our good friends the Russian could do about it. So, we called the American for help, you made the NATO, the UN for us and that's how you imported the Cold War from Europe.

 

The whole party system in the US needs to go away.

Demos want the socialist transfer payments and giant gov't. Repubs want to enforce their moralist nonsense with big gov't. They pretend to oppose each other on TV for the useful idiots on both sides, one claiming to care for people, the other claiming moral virtue. All they are doing is picking the four opposing virtues and forcing people to go to one side or the other.

Both are opposites sides of the same coin. Both profit from the infighting they cause in the body politic. Both profit individually from the graft, fraud, abuse and theft from the treasury. Both protect and insulate incumbents of BOTH parties by arranging election laws and restricting entrance of other candidates to debates (+90% reelection rate of incumbents). Both protect themselves with a supplicant news media that profits from airing the both party's gibberish. The news hosts profit individually by babbling about and perpetuating the belief that Demo/Repub actually oppose one another because it keeps people watching, which keeps their ratings up, which keeps money flowing to the networks etc. Both party's rookie politicians enter office paupers and leave multi-multi-millionaires.

The party system profits only the party system and is destructive to the nation, the economy, and most of all to we the people. The sooner people realize that they are staring at the cat's cradle, or same coin, or political puppet show (pick your euphemism, it's all the same poison), and break the system the better.

 

Thank you for that clarification.

And that's why I've come to call those who call me a socialist liars. Because that's what it is.

Those same people though would also call the UK socialist as well as all of the EU which they've been predicting the death of for more than 100 years now even though they existed for centuries before that.

Also if you get the chance you might notice that many people in the US don't understand the differences between "socialists" and "communists" and believe they are the same thing.

 

You a socialist? no fricking way. IMO, you are a dyed in the wool liberal, with socialist aspirations.
Socialists actually make more sense.

 

Yes it does. Very big parties in northern europe are social democratic, I know in Denmark atleast, the "socialist democrats" have the biggest party with around 35% of the votes. Liberals come in second with 30%. Conservatives have a whopping 6% and is the second smallest party in the country.

Sorry but that is an American invention, not the definition of liberalism or conservatism.

Liberalism acually support all types of freedom, democracy and that selfishness is a positive thing.

Conservatism wants to uphold traditional institutions and supports minimal and gradual change in society.

I think some of your politicians need to go back to their social science class or change the name of their party.

 

Oh well you remain a phony old bullshitter pushing the lie of conservatism every chance you get even when its failed so miserably once again right before our very eyes.

I mean without a huge and well funded federal government who would you conservative/Republican/Tea Baggers have to bail you out the next time your greed and corruption collapses our economy?

That's the lie of conservatism as it is preached and practiced in this nation.

 

How about those $18 trillion in entitlements our private financial sector just sucked up. That's not socialism? Running to our government to get bailed out because they are too big to fail? That's not socialism?

Nope. Not really. That's just the lie of conservatism as it is preached and practiced in this nation.

 

The failure of conservatism is a figment of your imagination. What has failed is the socialistic/liberal hybrid policies that you are so fond of. You know, those policies that have been forced upon all businesses, public institutions (such as schools) and individuals turning them into underachieving pools of mediocrity.

The big lie is the "progressive" bullshit.

 

without paying any taxes? I know of noone on the right who is opposed to paying their fair share ...of constitutionally justifiable federal needs. We aren't opposed to clean water and being good stewards of our resources ...but to kick people off their land over a fucking bug?! I'd find it hilarious if you had land, had to make payments on that land (perhaps agriculture, perhaps hunting) and all of a sudden you are told that it's off limits. Just keep making your payments and don't touch anything, cool? You wouldn't be so fond of it then.

The only people I am aware of looking for a free ride are on the left, and the free ride just gets more and more inclusive ...at the expense of others.

Brainwashed parrots repeat the same mindless shit, that's you and your 'logical fallacy right wing noise machine' smokescreen.
No links to podesta or huffpuff or tpm? Lol

Well, in the sea of shit Obama created, we're floating along better than most. At a red light today at lunch I looked around and noticed that I could see no other Texas plates. Cali, illinois, mass, NY, AZ, and I think the last one was from Fla. I don't think they are here for our sightseeing, they're coming to the jobs. Like it or not, facts is facts. :excited:

 

I am a big fan of social democracy. I distinguish between it and democratic socialism in that under social democracy most commercial property remains in private hands, but there is a well financed public sector of the economy paid for with steeply progressive taxation. There are also strong labor unions, and a high minimum wage.

Under democratic socialism the major corporations and most of the other businesses would be owned by the government and administered in ways that reduced economic inequality. There would be regular contested elections, and anti socialist political parties would have full legal equality with socialist parties. Political campaigns would be financed by the government, as they are in many European countries. There would be no restrictions on political debating, but it would be easier for those without financial backing to get their messages out.

That is what does not exist anywhere. Socialist economies have always been governed by dictatorships. I believe a dictatorship is an unacceptable government for a socialist economy.

 

What about corporations like General Electric that pay no taxes?

 

That is a myth that has been busted. Not only did GE pay some tax in the US, it paid taxes to state, county, municipal, payroll and other local taxes. And since it has yet to file its final 2010 return on corporate income, it has made payments to the IRS on the potential tax due.

 

You're obviously taking GE's word for this...as is your wont. But the case is far from clear, and the NYT stands by its story. It is not a myth, and it has not been busted, unless you buy into GE spin.

http://www.businessinsider.com/ge-taxes-2010

 

The NYT article was not proven to be true, it was never recanted by them. But in the meantime, tax records clearly show that GE has indeed paid taxes in 2010.

They have also made payments to the IRS in 2011 for corporate taxes that may be due upon they're filing.

Once again, it boggles my mind how ignorant the media can be on this. Not to mention the ignorance person who claimed that GE paid NO taxes. If they had claimed that GE has not filed their corporate tax return for the period in question they would be correct.

 

To help Kimi and other similarly minded individuals in here understand my position on the GE tax issue, I invite you to read this article from the Atlantic by Megan McArdle:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/03/did-ge-really-pay-no-us-taxes-in-2010/73178/

The opening paragraph or two help set the stage: