Posted on 07/27/2004 6:19:49 PM PDT by wagglebee
We've already reported how Communist Party USA has endorsed John Kerry for president, and now we're pleased to note that Democratic Socialists (isn't that redundant?) of America has chimed in as well.
"Kerry was hardly the first choice of our members. Most supported Dennis Kucinich or Howard Dean in the Democratic primary elections and would be very critical of Senator Kerry's voting record on trade issues, as well as his support for the resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq; but the most important concern of our members now is to defeat Bush," said Frank Llewellyn, the socialists' national director.
What? They've now concluded that Kucinich can't bag the nomination?
With friends such as these, Kerry won't need any enemies.
Socialists,
Communists
Maybe someday one of them will explain the difference to the rest of us.
YA THINK?!?
Demosociocoms?
I reckon he won't get one single vote from an American.
Of course they do... they are his real Band of Brothers.
Socialists and Communists? I guess that is Kerry bipartisanship.
of a SHAM!
"Democrats,
Socialists,
Communists
Maybe someday one of them will explain the difference to the rest of us."
No real difference. They're all neo-coms.
Simple-- Democrats are Socialists who need to hide their true identity from gullible voters. Socialists are Communists who need to hide their true identity from gullible voters. Communists are Socialists who got your guns.
"Democrats are Socialists who need to hide their true identity from gullible voters. Socialists are Communists who need to hide their true identity from gullible voters. Communists are Socialists who got your guns."
Hmmm, and liberals don't want to be known as liberals.
Funny how all these groups have to hide their true identities/intentions to get elected! Even they seem to know that their ideals are shunned by normal thinking individuals. But they have to disguise themselves to get elected.
I call that deceit. Or subterfuge. Definitely dishonest.
Definitely Democrat.
Why not add Al Queida? Hama? France?
Are the commies running a candidate this year?
Sarge, is there a difference between Communism and Socialism?
To be a Demoncrat IS to be a socialist, so what's new about this?
I do think it is hilarious that the Communist Party in the U.S. is backing Kerry/Edwards.
At the risk of bashing, here's mine: The way I see this, ideologically, Communism and Socialism are almost the same hue in the spectrum.
The difference lies in HOW each system comes into power.
Communism, almost universally but with a few exceptions, comes to power through violent overthrow of an existing political base; the Bolsheviks, and the Viet Cong, for examples. The political opposition is physically eliminated, or driven out.
Socialism, largely, comes into power through the manipulation of the election process. This gives the veneer to all observers of the legitimacy of their cause. I cite the rise of the NSDAP in Germany. After the attempted revolt in Munich - the Beer Hall Pustch (sp) - the Party proceeded to use the election laws to successfully secure their way to power. I should also mention the political power of the Democrats in America with that method, as well...
They really, come to the same endstate: the absolute authority and supremacy of The State over the individual.
So, Communism has infiltrated the socialist structure much like the way they hijacked the democratic party? Did you ever read the Communist Manifesto and the Muslim Manifesto? They too are almost identical.
Is that what is happening? Carnivoring?
It seems the next evolutionary step. Remember the final endgame: Power.
Surprise!
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.