Brad Wardell's site for talking about the customization of Windows.
Published on October 7, 2008 By Frogboy In Politics

I figured that Obama narrowly won the first debate.  The VP debate was largely a draw. But the second Presidential debate I have to say McCain won decisively.  Still not going to vote for him, but McCain answered questions, was specific, and seemed to know what he was doing.  Obama came across as someone who practiced debating but seemed like an empty suit.


Comments (Page 4)
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4 
on Oct 10, 2008

 I don't understand why not being Republican makes you into an automatic socialist. 

Boy, you are such an idiot.

Can you read?

I said Obama can be called a socialist because he proposes and promoted _socialist policies_. Is that so difficult to understand? What's the problem? What is the difficult part? What's the part you don't get?

 

on Oct 10, 2008

Leauki


 I don't understand why not being Republican makes you into an automatic socialist. 



Boy, you are such an idiot.

Can you read?

I said Obama can be called a socialist because he proposes and promoted _socialist policies_. Is that so difficult to understand? What's the problem? What is the difficult part? What's the part you don't get?

 

 

Again you say it's liberals who call every one ignorant and stupid, but you argue over semantics and frustrated exagerations.  I'll admit it's my fault for bringing frustrations that have nothing do with the conversation in as a way of releasing. That was my mistake. Look at what you just said. Look, for all your high and mighty talk about fairness. I tried to make obvious that having a few policies that can be considered socialist by defination, does not make you a socialist. Thats what america is about, different beliefs, or atleast thats what I was raised to believe. Obama does not say we should have the government take over every single buisness, he does nt say the government should nationalize the oil industry. I have heard no cry from democrats to nationalize the coca cola or the soft drink industry. Socialism is teh government controlling all industries. Obama does not propse that. Hell he doesn't even propose that for the healthcare industry, he proposes making sure big buisness allows healthcare to employees, and small buisness at half the cost. Thats not universal mandated health care. Thats making sure everyone is able to get it. For the record I also supported John Edwards far more than Obama, his health care plan ws much better, taking insurance companies out as the middle man. Hillary Clinton is the only canididate to my knowledge that proposed full scale punishment on citizens that did not have healthcare(similiar to RomneyCare in Mass.,which failed horribly , that state where I lived for the past 19 and half years, now one and half months in fl.).  I came to this board to find intelligent arguments that would cause me to rethink my beliefs, and consider others. Your responce gave me neither.

on Oct 10, 2008

I thought straight after the debate (before hearing any commentary about it or any other opinions) that mccain won quite significantly...not enough to change the game, but well enough to put doubt into obama supporters minds. McCain, I thought had obama on the defensive the whole way.. this can be seen with obama complaining and then insisting to have a chance to react to mccain statement, but then just repeated what he had said before.

I dont think mccain can win!, honestly, i just don't think the majority of americans like him, he is not refined enough because I thought he put up a good case to vote for him but the polls say obama won so i dunno!

on Oct 11, 2008

I dont think mccain can win!, honestly, i just don't think the majority of americans like him, he is not refined enough because I thought he put up a good case to vote for him but the polls say obama won so i dunno!

In the last three elections the person the media said would win, the polls said would win, were wrong.

Polls are not reliable when things are this close.  Most of them are done by telephone and there are a lot of reliability issues with that. 

Don't be discouraged.  Vote and let the chips fall where they may.

on Oct 11, 2008

Again you say it's liberals who call every one ignorant and stupid, but you argue over semantics and frustrated exagerations.

No. I argue over you misrepresenting what I (and everybody else) said.

Plus, while liberals call people ignorant over disagreements, I called you an idiot not for your opinion but for your inability to understand simple concepts. Our political disagreements, if there are any, do not even come into it.

While Obama is a socialist, I did not say that I disagreed with his socialist positions. In fact I mentioned that I was in favour of some of them. This has nothing to do with a non-liberal calling a liberal an idiot for his politics. I was referring SOLELY and ONLY to you, not your opinions.

I think you are an idiot because after being told that Obama is a socialist because of his socialist policies you continued to claim that the issue was that him not being a Republican makes him an automatic socialist in the eyes of Republicans. I told you that that was not true, and you didn't understand. That's why you are an idiot. It has nothing to do with your possible liberal opinions.

Plus you don't seem to understand why calling a socialist a socialist is not an insult while calling an anti-fascist a fascist is.

 

Maybe a summary will help you:

 

Obama

- supports socialist policies

- is supported by foreign and domestic socialist politicians (and fascist politicians)

- can be called a socialist because of his support for socialist policies

- "socialist" is not an insult

 

McCain (and Bush)

- does NOT support fascist policies

- is being CONDEMNED by foreign and domestic fascist politicians (and socialist politicians)

- hence CANNOT be called a fascist

- "fascit" is an insult

 

Do you get it now why calling a socialist a "socialist" is NOT comparable to calling a man fascists hate a "fascist"?

 

on Oct 11, 2008

Leauki


Obama

- supports socialist policies

- is supported by foreign and domestic socialist politicians (and fascist politicians)

- can be called a socialist because of his support for socialist policies

- "socialist" is not an insult

 

McCain (and Bush)

- does NOT support fascist policies

- is being CONDEMNED by foreign and domestic fascist politicians (and socialist politicians)

- hence CANNOT be called a fascist

- "fascit" is an insult

 

Do you get it now why calling a socialist a "socialist" is NOT comparable to calling a man fascists hate a "fascist"?

 

 

okay I am pretty much done with this go now where arguement. I will say again,  McCain and Bush support just as much Facist policies as Obama does Socialist.  For McCain, the can refer to the Military side of things, or politicisation
 of the justice dept.(only Bush Adminstration), and other domestic policies the are against freedom. your  right though I must be an Idiot, because I don't understand why supporting some socialist policies makes you a card carrying commie. He does not want Nationalise the healthcare industry, he doesnt want to nationalize the oil industry, he doesn't want to nationalize the banking industry. I guess I will the smart people continue their conversations, I will go back to being an idiot doing idiot things like reading.

on Oct 11, 2008

I will say again,  McCain and Bush support just as much Facist policies as Obama does Socialist. 

And that would be a lie, as I told you before.

Obama actually does promote socialist policies. But McCain and Bush support no fascist policies.

That's why socialists (and fascists) all over the world support Obama and not McCain or Bush.

 

I must be an Idiot, because I don't understand why supporting some socialist policies makes you a card carrying commie. He does not want Nationalise the healthcare industry, he doesnt want to nationalize the oil industry, he doesn't want to nationalize the banking industry.

No. What you don't understand is simple sentences in English. For example, nobody said anything about card-carrying commies. Supporting many socialist policies makes one a _socialist_. That's what socialists do: they support socialist policies.

But on the other hand, supporting policies that fascists hate and oppose does NOT make one a fascist. What's so difficult about that?

You might want to read up on socialism and socialist politicians.

Once you understand what socialism is, and understand the difference between socialism and communism (in politics), and learn about fascism and what fascists think about McCain and Bush, you might not be an idiot any more.

Perhaps you lack experience. I have lived in in two European countries. My parents were for a long time members of a socialist party (which never ever promoted nationalising any major industries and in fact opposed communism). I myself voted for socialists in 1998.

And I have met German neo-Nazis. And I can tell you they absolutely HATE Israel and America and especially George W. Bush. They hate him and everything he stands for. They hate the fact that the US invaded Iraq (surprisingly enough neo-Nazis supported the Baath dictatorship, which makes a lot of sense considering the history of the Baath party and what it stands for and when and why it was founded). They hate support for Israel. And they hate most Republicans.

I cannot tell neo-Nazis who and what I am, of course, because REAL fascists, in contrast to your phantasy fascists of the Republican party, react badly to certain ethnic groups.

 

And the reason the argument goes "nowhere" is simply that you refuse to understand simple facts.

Again:

Obama supports socialist policies and is hence a socialist.

McCain does not support fascist policies and is hence not a fascist.

Obama is supported by socialists (and fascists) everywhere in the world.

McCain is hated by fascists (and socialists) everywhere in the world.

 

Calling Obama a "socialist" is a legitimate rating of his political positions. Calling McCain a fascist is stupid and silly, given that his political positions make him the sworn enemy of fascists world-wide and in the US.

 

Here is an article by David Duke, an actual white supremacists and the "intelectual" voice of the Ku-Klux-Klan about George Bush:

http://newsfromthewest.blogspot.com/2007/12/david-duke-says-impeach-george-bush.html

 

Let's see what a fascists thinks about the politician you think should be called a "fascist". I don't think I have to quote statements of German socialists (of both socialist parties) about Obama, do I?

Anywhere, here we go:

"It shows once more that the Neocons and their puppet George Bush have been lying to us about Iran for at least 5 years, fomenting war against an innocent nation. Accusing pre-Second World War Germany of “planning an aggressive war,” America led the prosecution at Nuremberg. Is President Bush not guilty of those charges. America is now seen by the world as a rogue, terrorist nation, launching a lie-fomented Iraq War for Israel’s strategic interests, and trying to launch a devastating war on Iran for Israel."

"In every way George Bush and his Neocon handlers have been a catastrophe for true American interests."

"And now, this supine servant of the Israeli extremists and their unholy influence over American politics and media, have tried to create an even more devastating war against Iran, and once again, all of his machinations and of his Jewish-supremacist bosses have turned out to be nothing but lies."

You can read similar statements about George Bush (and now McCain) on German and Arab neo-Nazi Web sites.

 

Realise that that is why so many Republicans think that all liberals are loonies. You people either don't know these things or you don't care. The fact that YOU (at least claim to) think that fascism is bad does not stop you from (I) allying with fascists and (II) calling George Bush a fascist.

Perhaps, if fascism is so bad, you should support those that fight fascism and whom fascists hate? Or is that too rational?

 

My major reason for supporting George Bush, whose economic policies I do not always support (you see, I am a bit of a socialist myself), is that those who want to kill me HATE him. Those in Germany who still believe that Hitler was the good guy HATE George Bush. Those in the Arab world who believe the same also HATE George Bush.

And left-wing loonies hate him too.

Seems like the guy has a lot going for him.

I cannot imagine violent protests against Obama in Germany. Can you?

All the violent people hate George Bush, not Obama. Doesn't that worry you at all?

 

 

 

 

 

on Oct 11, 2008

I will go back to being an idiot doing idiot things like reading.

Yeah, right, because you struck everyone as the guy who "reads" a lot.

 

on Oct 11, 2008

It might be of some interest that Joerg Haider, Austrian neo-Nazi politician and governor of the Austrian state of Carinthia, has died yesterday in a car accident.

Bloomberg reports here:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=alTn45Ee18wM

 

He was a typical fascist:

- his parents were members of the NSDAP

- he praised Adolf Hitler's labour policy

- he was a personal friend of Saddam Hussein's

- criticised George Bush over his Iraq policy

- was famous for his verbal fights with the Jewish community in Vienna

- did not improve the relations between Austria and Israel to say the least

- was against foreigners and immigration

 

 

on Oct 11, 2008

I don't really care if a bunch of people I have never met believe or don't believe I read. A book you may like is Jennifer Government, It is a satire. Go to your local book store a read a few chapters if you wish.

I have question though do you believe all or most progressives are socialists? If not, what specific examples of Obama's policies lead you to believe he is a socialist?

I don't care what other peoples opinions are of other people. Becuase Socialists like Obama, I do not find that any reason to believe Obama is a socialist. Becuase McCain gave money to the terrorist drug smuggling Contras, I have no reason to believe he believes the same as them, or believes the same as the man who was in the center of the Iran-Contra affair(whom sold 68 million in missles and other weapons to the US government labeled State sponser of Terror Iran, then funneled the money also to the Contras. A man whose endorsement of McCain was proudly featured on McCain's website).

I used the term card carring commie becuase the origin of the word socialism comes from Karl Marx description of the transitional state between capitalism and communism.

I do not know if you realise my argument likening Bush to fascism was related to social and international policies, not economic. Examples being Politisation of the justice dept. Encourging the use of violence by Military organizations. Outsourcing the war to mercenarys. The use of fear mongering using the same genaric cases. Perhaps Police State or Totalitarianism(The Bush administrations gross over reaching of power) would have been better than fascism do the associated economic impications.

Can we both try to return civility to this conversation, instead of hurling insults.

on Oct 12, 2008

 

I don't really care if a bunch of people I have never met believe or don't believe I read.

If that were true you wouldn't have brought it up.

 

I have question though do you believe all or most progressives are socialists? If not, what specific examples of Obama's policies lead you to believe he is a socialist?

 

I don't know what a "progressive" is, but I noticed the word was often used by people opposed to regime change in Iraq and other Arab dictatorships to describe themselves. Not all of those "progressives" are socialists. Some are, as I mentioned before, fascists trying to protect allied dictatorships.

I already told you who I believe to be a socialist and why. So what is that question about? You just keep ignoring what I say and seem to be stuck in a loop.

Several people here have listed those of Obama's positions that are socialist. I am not going to list them again. I can expect you to go back and read all the stuff you previously ignored, can't I?

 

I do not know if you realise my argument likening Bush to fascism was related to social and international policies, not economic

Can you please go back and read what we both wrote? Except for one statement about Hitler's labour policy I wasn't talking about economic policies AT ALL.

I was mostly talking about international policies. George's Bush international policies were anti-fascist to the core, and have been harshly criticised by white supremacists in the US and neo-Nazis in Europe. John McCain stands for roughly the same policies and fascists are criticising him too. (Ron Paul was more to their liking.)

I don't know if you realise, but when I talk about one subject, that's the subject I am talking about. So when I keep talking about international policies in response to your "argument", just assume that that was the subject I thought your "argument" was about.

It might perhaps surprise you to learn that support for minorities in the middle east (including most prominently Jews and Israel, and Kurds in Iraq and Syria) and opposition (including violent such) to fascist dictatorships like Iraq and Syria _IS_ anti-fascism. OTOH supporting fascists like the dictators and ruling parties of Syria and (back then) Iraq does NOT constitute anti-fascist policy.

And those positions are exactly what white supremacists like David Duke and other KKK ilk are opposed to. They condemn Israel and openly support Syria (and openly supported Iraq). David Duke visited Syria last year. Joerg Haider (Austria neo-Nazi, recently died) visited Saddam Hussein in 2003 before the invasion to voice his support for the Baath regime.

The other international policies that George Bush promoted were isolation of North-Korea (which is arguably something a fascist might also do), and sponsoring peace treaties that ended civil wars in Liberia and Sudan (protecting black Christians and animists from Arab nationalists). The last two are obviously not "fascist policies".

George Bush's position regarding Iran is also widely condemned by white supremacists and neo-Nazis. It's hardly a fascist policy to try to keep a dictatorship openly hostile to several of its neighbours from getting nuclear weapons.

As for Bush's social policies, you might have to enlighten me (and that means point to a source) about what social policies George Bush supported and why they are fascist. The only social policies that Bush supported that I remember are that thing about no kid left behind and his position regarding illegal immigrants from Mexico (where his stance was again condemned by white supremacists).

 

Can we both try to return civility to this conversation, instead of hurling insults.

I don't know. Can you?

Once you actually seem to react to what was said and don't just keep coming back with the same faulty statements about socialists and fascists, I'll happily admit that I don't think that you are an idiot any more.

We'll see whether the explanation above will have any impact whatsoever on your part of the discussion. But what I expect is that you will again completely ignore everything I said and just pretend that it makes sense that calling McCain a fascist is the same as calling Obama a socialist, for no reason other than that you don't know what fascists believe and what socialists believe.

 

4 PagesFirst 2 3 4