[PapaNew]

1st post, I said: Socialism is force cloaked in "compassion." It's a wolf in sheep's clothing. It's A saying he wants to "help" (entitle) B but only by using C's money which A must take by force and only after A skims off the top for himself (B may never actually see any of that money). If you're blind, all you see is A entitling B. If you have your head screwed on straight, you see A is actually living off of C's money while making B dependent on A (like a drug dealer).

Your response: Nonsense.

2nd post, I said: Please explain how Socialism (what we have now - ex. Obamacare) is not A (the government) saying they want to help B (the uninsured) by forcing money from C (you and I)?

Your response: Are you unintelligent, purposely obtuse, or simply a troll? Why should I explain that which is patently obvious? Of course that is what socialism is.

It seems you would argue with me about 2+2=4. Sorry I bothered you.

[Lazamataz]

You are being purposely obtuse -- but I have made you my own personal little hobby. It is a very bad thing to become Lazamataz's hobby.

Trust that.

It seems you would argue with me about 2+2=4. Sorry I bothered you.

No, but I would argue with you when you claim that some of the arguments against Amnesty (that have been proposed on this thread) are socialist.

That's 'trolling', frankly.