Posted on 12/10/2008 7:41:47 AM PST by SmithL
Let the record show that it was George W. Bush, the rich Texas Republican, who brought socialism to America, so don't blame it on that African American Chicago Democrat community organizer who made it into the White House. The government takeover of the banking and automobile industries not only happened on President Bush's watch, it was also the deregulatory mania of this president's family, beginning with his father, which took this country into such starkly unfamiliar territory.
What a betrayal of unfettered free market capitalism. And who would have thought that it would be the candidates backed by conservative pundits Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh who made it possible? You actually could trace the destruction of corporate capitalism to the much-ballyhooed "Reagan Revolution" of the movie actor who got his main training for the presidency as a huckster for General Electric, where he honed the message of "getting government off our backs." The revolution of unfettered corporate capitalism led to an era of unfettered corporate greed, which sowed the seeds of its own destruction.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Unfettered immigration while shipping large portions of our economy to other countries are characteristics of globalism. Clintons started it, Bushs finished it.
Both had the idea that America could cool the entire world by turning the A/C on full blast and leaving all the windows open. A noble if naive thought.
And now as GW packs up and heads back to Texas with a shoulder shrug and a giggling "sorry 'bout that", we have to pay the utilities bill.
Geez it’s not like Congress has been controlled by the Dems during this whole time? *sarcasm*
This is an expert opinion coming from a communist.
all they do is to 1) dilute the message
they certainly do. If Mccain won, conservatives would have to defend his %^$# economic policies for 4 years just like they did with Bush.
Scheer *is* a socialist, so what’s he complaining about???
No, Woodrow Wilson is much more correct. Wilson + Federal Reserve + income tax + first regulations (WWI) on prices etc.
Wilson gave us a dry run of the New Deal, which begat Big Govt.
Republicans are not socialists and the democrats are for all intents and purposes the new Communists in America.
All true. However, in the modern era, Lyndon Johnson put socialism into warp drive before he decided on not running for a second term. To me, it's always seemed as if Kennedy was assasinated precisely so Johnson could create the "Great Society." Hmm.
well, that’s part of the deal as conservatives. We’re going to say no to a lot of things that people want. In return we’ll actually solve problems.
But if we just say no but we really don’t know what we’re doing and the economy stinks as a result then what’s the point. Given a choice between 2 idiots, people will go for the liberal because he says yes to everything.
I was thinking of another word, but JimRob might zot me for about an hour or so, just for fun...
“To me, it’s always seemed as if Kennedy was assasinated precisely so Johnson could create the “Great Society.””
You said a mouthful there. Even members of the left wing media will admit JFK’s assassination was a left wing plot, not a right wing deal (as they first suspected in the hours after the assassination). JFK was anti-communist. Go listen to vintage audio of his old speeches, esp. the one in Berlin. He sounds like Reagan! Obama has nothing in common with JFK politically.
As for Bush, one would have to be blind not to see that he has enabled socialism to grow in this country but NOT standing up to the Democrats. Right from the beginning he was compromising with them, like on the Kennedy education bill. Bush’s words when Obama was elected, gushing about how awesome it was, made me physically ill.
Until the Republican Party has the balls to cast out every RINO in its party we will continue to lose elections. People have no respect for hypocrites. Stand for Reagan conservatism and you have my vote, not otherwise.
— he has enabled socialism to grow in this country but NOT standing up to the Democrats
Typo: I meant to write by not standing up
Robert Scheer is a 72 year old lifelong Socialist Pimp that was fired from the LA Times within the past few years IIRC.
Usually I see his name as author of an article, I skip over to the next, and go on as he’s a glorious waste of precious time to read.
I refer to him as “The sick unit”.
This article is a great example as to why I don’t read anything by the man. I only read the first sentence of the excerpt of this article.
I agree with that, my biggest complaint against Bush is his refusal to pardon the Border Patrol agents. He has a deal with the Mexican government.
Well, if that's true, how come all you Socialists hate him so much?
Well after 8 years, I think it was pretty darn clear that Mr. Bush was never about "reaching across the isle" or a "new tone" in politics. Like his pops, W really is a One Worlder, for whatever reason. The "new tone" and all that was cover for enacting his socialistic views.
Until the Republican Party has the balls to cast out every RINO in its party we will continue to lose elections. People have no respect for hypocrites. Stand for Reagan conservatism and you have my vote, not otherwise.
Like many, I held my nose and voted McCrazy, and I'm still conflicted about him losing. But the key was, like many others, I wasn't energized and didn't do anything to help his campaign like I did with W and the results of so much apathy is now smaking us in the face. So, like you, I'll not compromse again. Why waste the time?
Mr. “We’re not independent, we’re interdependent” Bush just kept implementing the socilaism Clinton started. Globalism begets socialism you know.
Starting to look more and more like we just need to reboot.
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.