Posted on 07/10/2026 5:11:44 AM PDT by MtnClimber
According to Wisconsin socialist Democrat candidate Francesca Hong, "I think that when folks hear 'socialism,' they may be taken aback, but I bring it back to potholes and the [Green Bay] Packers and public education."
That was how Hong explained to an MSNOW interviewer her deceitful strategy to slip evil past Badger State voters.
Maine's garbage-hearted Graham Platner may have quit his electoral effort, but the communist wickedness that today wields great influence in the Democrat party ain't goin' nowhere.
Hong's 'spoonful of sugar' skullduggery is common to scheming electoral subversives. Rather than concede communism has murdered some 100 million people over centuries, they extend warm rhetoric about kitchen-table matters.
Don't expect the Mamdanis to confess their ideology's bloody history, systematic denial of individual liberty, fundamental foulness, or -- worst of all -- contempt for belief in God.
They are communists -- let's dispense with the calculatedly misleading 'Democratic Socialists' -- and lying comes naturally to them. Zealots feel their cause to be noble, and that the end justifies dirty tactics.
In just the last month, they've accrued victories in the city of Washington, New York, and Colorado. So, Democrat voters themselves deserve a share of the blame.
Some are ardent enemies of America who throng Antifa riots, anti-ICE obstructions, and No Kings events. A larger share, it's a reasonable assumption, have pulled the D lever for decades and robotically continue doing so without spending a moment in honest critical consideration.
At the June 26 Faith and Freedom conference, President Trump was adamant: "Our warriors did not fight communism on battlefields across the world only to have that menace rear its ugly head right back here in America. We're not gonna let it happen."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
“Our warriors did not fight communism on battlefields across the world only to have that menace rear its ugly head right back here in America. We’re not gonna let it happen.” - President Donald J. Trump
“I think that when folks hear ‘Fascism’ or ‘death camps’ they may be taken aback, but I bring it back to making trains run on time.”
She brings up a good point about the Packers, and one of the main reasons I hate them.
Potholes, professional sports, and public education are exactly the reasons to reject socialism.
.
Ask folks if you would like your rich neighbor to share his bank account with you. Or if you’d like the grocery to give you a week of free shopping. Or if you would like someone to take care of your kids for free.
Of course, you know the answer. But you haven’t asked “how, exactly, will you do that”. And you won’t get an “exactly answer....until the bill comes due
Better to argue the foundational principles of the constitution with these people. You’ll argue definitions of what’s soc/comm forever. Historical references don’t convince them because they believe they will be different. This’d only work on the useful idiots. The true believers know what it leads to and look forward to implementing that.
E.g., what exactly is the role of government? is there an advantage to central planning? how should human nature be addressed? Is equality under the law better than “equity”? Do “bad people” only exist in the world of business or are there bad people in government too? Is greed for money any worse than greed for power?
Discussing those topics leads to better arguments for the US system defined under the Constitution. May also help to review federalist/anti-federalist papers.
“Capitalism” is a moniker created by Marx. I avoid it. Free and fair markets is much better, which leads naturally to a discussion on what is “fair”.
So how should government regulate particular industries? Do they really need to get into the weeds of the business operations and pricing, or just make sure there is no fraud on either side of a transaction?
I’m hearing some potentially effective Democrat ads leaning heavily on “affordability” and tabletop/wallet issues that resonate. What they’re not talking about is how they intend to get the money for what will ultimately be subsidies. But for someone without a background in economics or knowledge about how things work the platitudes sound wonderful. Recall also that practically every voter out there is the result of public-school indoctrination.
There are dozens of policy shifts such as cutting down the cost of hiring people or cutting the bureaucracy about getting building approvals that would potentially have greater impact. Nobody brings those up as they are causes of people’s problems and not so visible as the price of bread or gas or a starter home.
The several Republican ads are saying things like, “I’ll quit spending taxpayer dollars abroad.” I think everyone knows that the positions these candidates are running for don’t have the power to do that. Isn’t there some party plan or directive that would help better focus Republican ads to push meaningful changes? Why aren’t Republicans trying to educate the voters?
Pinochet had it right.
L
?
To trust the Mamdanis think about the times you trusted Obama and Biden and look at what you caused.
When capitalism is mostly merely CUSIP numbers in computers then the CUSIP numbers can be redistributed.
Would Miss Urban like a CNC lathe turret?
No!!!
How about a plasma cutting head?
No!!!
“What they’re not talking about is how they intend to get the money for what will ultimately be subsidies”
Circa 1911 a federal corporate income tax was imposed. It took no constitutional amendment.
A 2% annual corporate share tax could be imposed, payable in shares issued in the same way stock dividends are.
There’s a reason the leftists use the word “equity”.
Really? Because when I hear 'public education,' I already, immediately think 'marxism.'
WIKI
Etymology
The term “capitalist”, meaning an owner of capital, appears earlier than the term “capitalism” and dates to the mid-17th century. “Capitalism” is derived from capital, which evolved from capitale, a late Latin word based on caput, meaning “head”—which is also the origin of “chattel” and “cattle” in the sense of movable property (only much later to refer only to livestock). Capitale emerged in the 12th to 13th centuries to refer to funds, stock of merchandise, sum of money or money carrying interest. By 1283, it was used in the sense of the capital assets of a trading firm and was often interchanged with other words—wealth, money, funds, goods, assets, property and so on.
The Hollantse Mercurius (1651-1691) uses “capitalists” in 1653 and 1654 to refer to owners of capital. In French, Étienne Clavier referred to capitalistes in 1788, four years before its first recorded English usage by Arthur Young in his work Travels in France (1792). In his Principles of Political Economy and Taxation (1817), David Ricardo referred to “the capitalist” many times. English poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge used “capitalist” in his work Table Talk (1823). Pierre-Joseph Proudhon used the term in his first work, What is Property? (1840), to refer to the owners of capital. Benjamin Disraeli used the term in his 1845 work Sybil. Alexander Hamilton used “capitalist” in his Report of Manufactures presented to the United States Congress in 1791.
The initial use of the term “capitalism” in its modern sense is attributed to Louis Blanc in 1850 (”What I call ‘capitalism’ that is to say the appropriation of capital by some to the exclusion of others”) and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in 1861 (”Economic and social regime in which capital, the source of income, does not generally belong to those who make it work through their labor”). Karl Marx frequently referred to the “capital” and to the “capitalist mode of production” in Das Kapital (1867). Marx did not use the form capitalism but instead used capital, capitalist and capitalist mode of production, which appear frequently. Due to the word being coined by socialist critics of capitalism, economist and historian Robert Hessen stated that the term “capitalism” itself is a term of disparagement and a misnomer for economic individualism. Bernard Harcourt agrees with the statement that the term is a misnomer, adding that it misleadingly suggests that there is such a thing as “capital” that inherently functions in certain ways and is governed by stable economic laws of its own.
In the English language, the term “capitalism” first appears, according to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), in 1854, in the novel The Newcomes by novelist William Makepeace Thackeray, where the word meant “having ownership of capital”. Also according to the OED, Carl Adolph Douai, a German American socialist and abolitionist, used the term “private capitalism” in 1863.
Other terms sometimes used for capitalism are:
Capitalist mode of production
Economic liberalism
Free enterprise
Free enterprise economy
Free market
Free market economy
Laissez-faire
Market economy
Profits system
Self-regulating market
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism
“At 40 percent of the AMI, there is one studio with a monthly rent of $978 for incomes ranging from $38,400 to $51,840, and eight one-bedrooms with a monthly rent of $1,040 for incomes ranging from $41,280 to $58,320.
“At 60 percent of the AMI, there is one studio with a monthly rent of $1,521 for incomes ranging from $57,018 to $77,760; two one-bedrooms with a monthly rent of $1,622 for incomes ranging from $61,235 to $87,480; and six two-bedrooms with a monthly rent of $1,930 for incomes ranging from $73,715 to $105,000.
“At 130 percent of the AMI, there is one studio with a monthly rent of $3,423 for incomes ranging from $122,229 to $168,480; one one-bedroom with a monthly rent of $3,661 for incomes ranging from $131,143 to $189,540; and three two-bedrooms with a monthly rent of $4,376 for incomes ranging from $157,578 to $227,500.
The new neighbors quite possibly would be paying $2,621 less for rent than the type of folks that most vigorously voted in the Democratic Socialists.
The type of folks that most vigorously voted in the Democratic Socialists need to vote more carefully and they should probably do so with their feet as the other end of their bodies isn’t working right.
“Jeder nach seinen Fähigkeiten, jedem nach seinen Bedürfnissen”
Funny how “Jeder” isn’t emphasized.
Commie trash would never “concede” such atrocities, they celebrate them. ‘Cause it was the wrong people who got murdered — the ones fighting the commies. That is a goal of all collectivist polities — get the ones who you are jealous of.
Like all leftists, collectivist polities are all about bullying, revenge, envy, etc. That is why they have always been part of the Democratic party, the party of slavery and pedo.
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.