Posted on 06/16/2012 5:41:04 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
Do you believe "progressive" is code language for "communist"?
A lot of people here do. "Yes, I agree with that question". Some don't. "No, a progressive is not a communist".
So then what say you about Mitt Romney, who has openly stated the very thing.(and his record shows the truth of his claim)
Vote for whomever you wish but if it is not for Romney, it will be for Obama no matter what.
Ahh... Yet another product of the 'new math', I see. Your statement borders upon being idiotic - And assumes too much.
What my vote WILL NOT BE is a vote for the advancement of liberalism/globalism/socialism/communism. Of that you can be sure.
Can you say as much?
“I’m just proposing the term be used carefully and properly, rather than sloppily to mean anything other than a government hostile to business.”
All variations are archaic, inefficient, and minimize the role and freedom of the individual as opposed to some group or other. All variations degenerate into crony capitalism at the very best. Something like it worked very well for a very long time in the later Roman republic and empire, but that was not a very happy place or time for most people, and the ‘yeoman class’ was effectively non-existent or even allowed to rise. Corporatism can work after a fashion, but is very much less than traditional American liberties and is definitely at odds with the Constitution.
Oh, I quite agree.
Corporatism, in its actual meaning, is at base the result of an emotional rejection of representative democracy and free market economics but an unwillingness to bounce over to the socialist side.
As I have stated earlier, it’s one of the numerous attempts to develop a “Third Way” between or other than the American system or socialism.
Ah, my misunderstanding. You were making a general clarification - which is an accurate one - but I thought you seeking more precision in my particular post.
Words are tricksy things, and if they are used in a sloppy way they do indeed lead to sloppy results. At worst, it leads to the increase of what Orwell described as “the streamlined men who think in slogans and talk in bullets”.
I know when a Freeper is going into orbit on this effort to pin the Communist tag on Mitt Romney. If the discussion were to examine Romney’s statement in Milford, New Hampshire, I am good with that type of scrutiny. This is scrutiny that all of us should do. But outlandish statements calling Romney a Communist is unacceptable. Such a charge has to be supported by more real evidence then some off the wall statement from You Tube.
I have been an “Anyone but Romney” guy from the beginning. I know, from his exposure in the state of Massachusetts, that he has been tainted. It is this state that harbored the King Communist, Senator Ted Kennedy, for 47 years and fellow traveler, John Kerry, for 25 years. It is amazing that, Republican, Scott Brown even made it in Massachusetts. An examination of the Communist leanings of Massachusetts would yield the context to Romney’s “taint.” But, I call it a taint and not anything near the flaming Communists that Congressman Allen West has named in Washington DC (which is another place for our scrutiny).
I am sure that David Axelrod is working real hard at Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts background to discourage the conservative support. It would do what I see is the partial story. It demands the context of the state that Romney was working. Anyone in an executive position in Massachusetts has to deal with the progressive environment that is being supported by the people of that state. That is a tough proposition. Thank God we have a Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin to show us how to deal with progressives and do the right thing.
Well said! There are too many DemonRATs willing to ride that piece of cardboard into the sewer, even when that water is Communist piss water. We have a President who is pissing that water by the teleprompter full. Mitt Romney is riding on Capitalist waters as has America from the beginning.
I think that we do have a real choice, contrary to the cartoon you posted. Even though Romney is not the nominee I wanted, you have to respect those who voted for him in all the states. For them, the economy is the big game we have to win. All the social issues will be wishful thinking if this nation collapses economically. The cartoon is appropriate for a nation that has failed.
People who naively believe that Romney has what it takes to turn the economy around, are ignoring his economic record as Governor of Massachusetts:
Mitt Romney’s Dismal Record
"As U.S. real output grew 13 percent between 2002 and 2006, Massachusetts trailed at 9 percent.
* Manufacturing employment fell 7 percent nationwide those years, but sank 14 percent under Romney, placing Massachusetts 48th among the states.
* Between fall 2003 and autumn 2006, U.S. job growth averaged 5.4 percent, nearly three times Massachusetts' anemic 1.9 percent pace.
* While 8 million Americans over age 16 found work between 2002 and 2006, the number of employed Massachusetts residents actually declined by 8,500 during those years.
"Massachusetts was the only state to have failed to post any gain in its pool of employed residents," professors Sum and McLaughlin concluded.
In an April 2003 meeting with the Massachusetts congressional delegation in Washington, Romney failed to endorse President Bush's $726 billion tax-cut proposal."
[Cato Institute annual Fiscal Policy Report Card - America's Governors, 2004.]
Romney's other "accomplishments".
1. Implemented/created Gay Marriage in MA
2. Supported and forced Gay Adoption in MA
3. Supported Abortion wholeheartedly
4. Raised taxes/fees over 300% while being Governor of MA
5. Implemented a state-level Cap and Trade system.
6. Supported Man-Made Global Warming
7. Supported the Brady Bill
8. Implemented a state level “Assault” Weapons Ban after the Federal AWB was allowed to expire.
9. Supported TARP
I’m with you. I just can’t understand the idea that Obama is somehow preferable to Romney. Warts and all, Romney is infinitely preferable to Obama. Practically anyone would be better than Obama, except perhaps, Bill Maher or other sycophantic lickspittles of his ilk.
Good information and the type of scrutiny we need to see. Is shows that Massachusetts has big issues economically and Romney dropping the ball to fix it. Now my curiosity asks why?
I probably was a little vague.
Corporatism is most often used by the Left, but also sometimes by the Right, to refer to “government by business corporations.”
But that’s just not what the term means.
Personally, I think the notion of providing for representative government by occupation rather than locality is not a completely illogical notion. In today’s world, a person’s physical location is not particularly important, and is losing relevance all the time.
Great cartoon! It sums it up quite well.
When you use and abuse words, then after a while they lose their meaning, lose their punch. And so it is with this mindless title. Who in history in all honesty deserves to be called "marxist communist socialist"? Who called himself that and who might be called that?
On this site it's come to the point where anyone that anyone else dislikes, out there or on this forum is labeled, yes, "marxist communist socialist".
The question doesn't deserve an answer.
That said, I believe that Obumster is in fact a marxist, in the 21st century sense, in that one suspects he reads and follows the writings of academic marxists, whom he professed to admire and associate with in his ghostwritten memoirs. But yes, the "progressives" of today are not the same as Teddy Roosevelt's progressives, and are all too similar to the socialists of Europe, or perhaps the Communists there, all of them organized in political parties of those names ("Greens" sometimes.) But whatcha gonna do in a stubburnly two party system? You infiltrate one of the parties, it doesn't matter which one, they are both for good things and against bad, those are exactly their only principles, and pretend that you belong, as no one will kick you out of the party as they would in multi-party systems.
1. Provide the evidence then.
2. Where have I used ad hominem?
Make sure you include the EVIDENCE for the claim that he’s a Soros puppet too.
;-)
The True Blue Romneyites are butchering this thread. Hilarious. I wonder if anyone over there is paid by Romney or the GOP to bash this place and come here and defend Mitt with that nobody but Mitt nonsense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.