Posted on 10/25/2008 10:48:19 AM PDT by BulletBobCo
Is this too extreme of a question?
Ich mag Ihr stil, Obama.
At this point in the election campaign, it would make no difference to most people if he admitted that he was a Stalinist, a Nazi, or a Satanist, the American people can not wait to rid themselves of the Republican Party in all matters. While I will be voting for this inept party, most Americans just want to wash their hands of the ineptness of GWB and the elected republican Congress critters.
Escape or fight? If they do the kinds of things that socialists and communists do, it's worth a fight. They will have stolen all which I've worked for all my life, leaving little to lose.
I would think more on the lines of Warsaw, the French Underground, and the first Civil war rather than running off to Mexico or wherever. This nation's too big and too many hard-working people stand to suffer if we let it go into the hands of the extreme left.
He’s a Marxist, anarchist, terrorist.
Decorum.
“Is this too extreme of a question?”
Are you gonna be the second FReeper today I have to Say *get a spine* to? Answer: HELL NO!
I just wrote an expose on this a few minutes ago. Valid question to ask.
http://www.prayformccainpalin.com/commu.html
“I vote Marxist”
Sure you don’t want to rephrase that?
Yes, the government of Cuba is communist. The government owns everything and “allows” the people to use it.
My family is from Cuba. When Castro came to power, they dispatched itemizers to each household. They cataloged people’s possessions. My grandmother tells me that when she and the family prepared to come here to the states (1962), government workers came and made sure that everything on their list was turned over to the government. They could take nothing with them. Not her wedding ring. Not a second change of clothes. Nothing. Even glasses that were broken were kept in paper bags so that the government could account for them. They were forced to repurchase a car they had sold in 1960 in order to turn it in to the government.
And things have not changed. Friends who came to the states a decade ago reported much the same thing. They are a little more lenient now (I think they could bring their clothes with them), but had the same kinds of itemized list of household goods that they were required to turn over.
Barry is a pawn, like the boll-weevil, just a lookin’ for a hooommme...
He unfortunately seems to charm lots of folks, but he is essentially a cold and self-obsessed sociopath. He has hitched his star to Bill Ayers’ 1960s revolution redux, and it’s playing out just fine for him.
Obama is not only a Marxist, he’s a particularly vicious type of Marxist. Think Lenin, Stalin and, eventually, Pol Pot. But his followers will love him and his Marxist Pygmalion, Bill Ayers, all the way to the gulag, as Stalin’s followers did.
Thanks for the correction. I really didn’t know what it meant. I picked this photo up and caption from another FReeper’s post and thought it must have been good. LOL
A long excerpt of an oldie but a goodie:
Reflections on Our Republic
by Chuck Missler
As we take stock of our Republic on this 4th of July, I’m indebted to some recent discussions I enjoyed with Jack Wheeler, the well-known adventurer, columnist, and insightful commentator on the “District of Corruption” headquartered on the Potomac.
A Rose by Any Other Name
As Ludwig von Mises observed,1 Fascism, Nazism, and Socialism are varying versions of the same core conviction: that it is the sacred duty of popular government to prevent the emergence of profits by public control of production and distribution.
What distinguishes Fascism and Nazism from Socialism in economic theory is how they translate “public control” into reality.
For the socialist, it means outright nationalization-government ownership-of private business. In a socialist state, the government owns and operates the airlines, railroads, banks, phone companies, and any other business you can think of. Everyone is an employee of the State.
For the fascist, public or government control is just that-control, rather than nationalized ownership, via complete bureaucratic regulation of ostensibly private business.
As an ardent admirer of Marx, Mussolini coined the term “Fascism”2 for his brand of authoritarian, patriotic Marxism. Fascism operates under the principle of “might makes right,” through the exercise of raw, naked governmental police power.
In America today, the increasingly rough-shod violation of constitutional rights by government agents in the name of “protecting the environment” or the “war on drugs” is an indication of how far we are proceeding in this direction.
Intellectually, fascism is far more dishonest than socialism, which at least has the courage to assert legal ownership of the economy and thus assume the legal responsibility for its functioning.
Fascism places the responsibility for the economy on business, which is rendered seemingly private, with the facade of private ownership. The result of both socialism and fascism is the same: the destruction of economic freedom, replacing the individual’s choice of how to make a peaceful, honest living with state edicts. Fascism accomplishes this, however, more insidiously.
Instead of being a straightforward employee of the government, you and I are told that our lives and businesses are still private, while any attempt to act as such is proscribed by a myriad of regulations-until we are trapped and immobilized in Washington’s web.
We become enmeshed in this web because it has been spun around us so slowly-strand by strand over many years-so slowly that we have barely noticed. We could call this slow spinning of the fascist web “Fabian Fascism.”
(Advocacy of what became known as Fabian Socialism was in vogue in the early part of the 20th century, particularly among British socialists such as Sydney and Beatrice Webb and George Bernard Shaw. They argued that socialism could best be achieved by “not frightening the horses”; that is, not through immediate revolutionary action, but in small, incremental steps.)3 Since the gargantuan growth of governmental power in the United States has not been sudden, but slowly accumulative, we can accurately and aptly call the process “Fabian Fascism.”
Manufactured Crises
Dictators have traditionally created external crises to consolidate internal power. People are then freely willing to trade freedom for security. The great discovery in recent times is that social crises can be just as effective as military ones. “Curing poverty,” or a “war on drugs” has become the banner under which the government can increase budgets, create new bureaucracies, and obtain new powers over the people.
But there is a big difference between an excuse and a purpose. These excuses are simply convenient subterfuges to trick the American people into letting the Washington Oligarchy expand its power.
After Johnson’s War on Poverty, Nixon’s War on Drugs, and Carter’s Energy Crisis, then came the premier liberal crisis of modern times, the Environmental Crisis. It was only thanks to Hillary Clinton’s hubris that the latest fashion in crisis-mongering failed - the Clinton Health Care Crisis.
All of these crises offered one, and only one, type of solution to the alleged crisis: vast government programs at taxpayers’ expense. None ever offered free market solutions, nor were they used to expand individual freedom rather than restrict it.
The media predictably plays an enthusiastic accomplice in these schemes, not just because its members are mostly liberal, but more importantly, crises generate more readers, viewers, and listeners. This is why the principal product American media sells to its customers is crisis, not information.
Certainly there are problems in our society, often severe, regarding poverty, drugs, the environment, et al. But the last thing these situations need is massive government intervention, which just makes them worse.
If these problems were actually solved, all these government programs and bureaucrats wouldn’t be needed. Thus, the crises must be perpetual, never solved, always requiring another program, another intervention, more taxpayers’ money, more authorities granted, etc.
The game is not to solve the problems but to use them to control people through regulations and subsidies, increasing their dependency upon the people writing and enforcing the regulations and providing the handouts. People who are dependent upon you are people who vote for you.
Democratic Fascism
The result is a form of fascist rule imposed upon a citizenry, not by a dictator who seized power by force, but by freely elected leaders. We could call it Democratic Fascism, whereby a people’s freedom is not taken away from them by dictatorial force, but is voluntarily surrendered.
Americans have imposed the tyranny of Washington upon ourselves. By a patient Fabian strategy taking many years, the American people have been persuaded, unwittingly and almost unconsciously, to voluntarily chain themselves to their masters in Washington.
No longer innocently oppressed, America has become a nation of belligerent beggars, demanding with insufferable arrogance an endless cornucopia of government handouts, subsidies, and “entitlements,” deferring the multi-trillion dollar tab upon our children and grandchildren.
This is, indeed, America’s real drug crisis: the most addictive and destructive drug ever invented-welfare and special interest subsidies. Thus we have voluntarily taken upon ourselves the tyranny of our increasingly fascist state.
Who’s accountable? We are, in our failure to hold our elected representatives accountable to us!
And much of the blame also needs to be laid on our silent pulpits. The same abrogation of responsibility that contributed to the Holocaust in Germany is evident in America.
God has blessed us with a unique heritage-and it is rarely declared or acknowledged from our pulpits. There is a deplorable lack of that God-given fiduciary responsibility-a sanctified form of patriotism-exhorted from our Christian pulpits.
I believe that our stewardship of our unique God-given heritage is one for which we will uniquely be held accountable.
Our Future
One of the most critical strategic assessments we each must make is regarding the feasibility of rolling back to a constitutional government.
If we have a government that doesn’t obey the Constitution, we have an outlaw government-literally acting outside the law.
Thanks for the link.
Good idea!
We can’t really pin down The One because he will morph throughout the following months and once we think we know him there will be yet another cyclic phase we will be exposed to. His madness deals with the moment of what he thinks we “need” to see and hear.
By the time we know all there is to know of this creature - if we are still functioning as a nation - we will have survived him.
I had an older friend who got out of Cuba with her diamond engagement ring stuffed in a finger cot stuffed in...well, let’s just say they didn’t think to go that far in those days.
he is a chameleon.
LOL
greetings
Maybe he’s a Faubian Socialist?
http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=FinalWarn05-1#Strategy
Make that Fabian Socialist
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.