2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumDoes Sen. Sanders believe there should be private property?
Some? None? Let the 'spalini of his democratic socialism begin.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)I should just shut up and worship the Bern!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)to translate Nu Pogodi into English!
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Very brave of the op to admit they don't know what communism is. Someone did post an informative video, let's hope the op watches it.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Anything?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)A loaded question is a logical fallacy that occurs when statements or questions are designed to confuse listeners into tacitly accepting something (which isn't obviously clear in the question) as true.
Loaded questions come in two forms.
[edit]Trick questions
Trick questions force the respondent to either admit to an opinion or fact they do not share, or deny a factual premise. The most famous example of a trick question like this is: "When did you stop beating your wife?" In this form, an answer that does not directly refute the premise of the question (e.g. "I've never married" or "I've never beaten my wife." admits the truth in it, implicitly at least.[1] An example of forced opinion: "So, you are going to vote for that lazy Obama?" If one says yes, they admit to Obama being lazy, if they say no, they are lying about voting. Another option would be to reply in a way that implicitly rejects the loaded language by substituting more neutral language: "I am going to vote for Obama." An example of forced fact: "So you are one of those god-denying evolutionists?" The interrogee may think evolution is a fact, but also could be, say, a Christian.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Loaded_question
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)What would he want nationalized. Banks? Major industries? What?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Your working definition -- one who would nationalize one or more industries -- ignores the way the word is frequently used today to describe states with things like a generous safety net, generous public benefits like free health care and education, and strong regulations and oversight of business.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)of major industries. The things you describe as a believer in a generous social safety net, strong environmental/labor regulation makes one a progressive/liberal or in Europe a Social Democrat. But not a Democratic Socialist. Or any kind of socialist. I think my working definitions are fine and you are wrong but thanks for the civility.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)kristopher
(29,798 posts)Is it necessary to exercise day to day control in order to be the beneficiary of some portion of the rights associated with ownership?
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)My year of law school. So I know just enough law to be dangerous. Remember the bundle of rights though and made a B in the class.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)Demagoguery is an appeal to people that plays on their emotions and prejudices rather than on their rational side. Demagoguery is a manipulative approach often associated with dictators and sleazy politicians that appeals to the worst nature of people.
demagoguery - Dictionary Definition : Vocabulary.com
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/demagoguery
kristopher
(29,798 posts)You have a kindergarten level of understanding on this topic.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)You argue so masterfully.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)...derive from the most charitable interpretation of your remarks.
ancianita
(35,925 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)he isn't a socialist. He should at least be for cooperatives of industry with labor and capitaliats sharing ownerahip. I am beginning to think his supporters don't know what a socoalist is. They seem to think it ia just a really liberal person.
ancianita
(35,925 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,160 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Totally put their minds at ease. Like most of the predictable responses here.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Just imagine what will happen when I invoke Chairman Meow:
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Im sure rhey will get whatever you are trying to say.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You're certainly not getting it. But I have faith, hang in there.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)You don't have an answer because you don't know?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)I am done with you.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You just didn't realize it.
I rec'd your thread, btw - it's a scream!
immoderate
(20,885 posts)Or de-privatize it a bit.
--imm
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)ancianita
(35,925 posts)Get to your point. In all honesty.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)But should he be our nominee, better answers than "red baiter! 1! 1" had better be forthcoming.
ancianita
(35,925 posts)You want to try http://www.ontheissues.org/Bernie_Sanders.htm
or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Sanders
or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism
or are you actually asking for more of an elevator pitch.
Read, summarize for yourself.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Busky, Donald F. (July 20, 2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. pp. 78. ISBN 978-0275968861. Democratic socialism is the wing of the socialist movement that combines a belief in a socially owned economy with that of political democracy. Sometimes simply called socialism, more often than not, the adjective democratic is added by democratic socialists to attempt to distinguish themselves from Communists who also call themselves socialists...democratic socialists wish to emphasize by their name that they disagree strongly with the Marxist-Leninist brand of socialism.
And summarize
ancianita
(35,925 posts)Try again.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Because it is a serious academic source.
ancianita
(35,925 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)ancianita
(35,925 posts)dynamic of politics and history.
Busky's fine. In recent history Socialists have tried to distinguish themselves from Communists, their obvious context being the mass hysteria over all things 'red,' and the lingering memory of stigmatizing witch hunts that our Congress staged.
You presented the definition. So I conclude that you also agree with Busky.
I see Capitalism's strengths and weaknesses played out beside the Communist Chinese government. It's the 'ownership' state that's still around. Democracies can opt to become socialist or communist because the people still have a structural mechanism for opting out of a structure that becomes too authoritarian. Not so in theocracies or monarchies.
Are you done here?
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)And I have never thought for a second Sanders is a Marxist-Lenninist or any other form of authoritarian. Frankly I think he is more a social democrat than a socialist, or at least his platform for president is.
As for Chinese Communism, I mean, they were never really in a state of communism by the Marxist defition and they aren't even very socialist now. More of a mixed economy with an authoritarian government. No?
ancianita
(35,925 posts)official 'story'.
Is it all serious? To me, no. When believers get involved, it's a matter of life and death.
Land base resource competition is the serious stuff of states -- extraction, energy, currencies. The politics is just the easy or hard means by which landbase resources get turned into symbols of value exchange.
Whole swaths of humanity ignore all this and run their own economies. The only scary things to humans these days is needless war and death.
ancianita
(35,925 posts)enough for any slice of the populace to no longer be "swing." They don't want to know the past political actions of the candidates or they would already. They'd line up the "likes/dislikes" of those actions and decide.
Truthfully, this "swing" idea is bullshit. It allows all manner of shananigans in the electronic rigging industry. Anyone calling themselves "swing" just like the cache of being open and skeptical when they actually don't care, don't do their homework, and will flip a coin in the voting booth.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)that wants to silence those that don't agree. You know, alert, lock, hide and ban. But you haven't even said anything. It's simple to insinuate but much harder to actually stand up and make an acquisition. And harder even yet to back up the insinuation. I think that insinuation via question is a conservative tactic, you know like Fox Noise ala. "Was Obama born in the USA?" "Is Sanders a Communist?".
If you really think that Sen Sanders is a communist (popular meme with conservatives), spit it out. Show some evidence. Make it a real discussion.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)This person has sent me three unsolicited and unanswered messages telling me to do just that.
INdemo
re: After your remark about Bernie Sanders and Communism you need to leave..
> And dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
> Go on back to your Freepers Forum
So, uh? yeah.
elias49
(4,259 posts)Don't care who you support.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)Punkingal
(9,522 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)There's too much private property in this world.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Serious question.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)TheBlackAdder
(28,160 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Serios question. If the answer is nothing he isn't a socialist. If he is a socialist what would he nationalize.
TheBlackAdder
(28,160 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)And I know that a socialist isn't just a super liberal. It meams that the workers should have control over their places of work. Often this takes the form of goverment ownership or cooperative ownership in which capital and labor share in the decision making. Just being for a social safety net and effective regulations is not socialism. It has become quite clear that many of his aupporters think a socialist os just a very liberal/left person. It is not.
mak3cats
(1,573 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Busky, Donald F. (July 20, 2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. pp. 78. ISBN 978-0275968861. Democratic socialism is the wing of the socialist movement that combines a belief in a socially owned economy with that of political democracy. Sometimes simply called socialism, more often than not, the adjective democratic is added by democratic socialists to attempt to distinguish themselves from Communists who also call themselves socialists...democratic socialists wish to emphasize by their name that they disagree strongly with the Marxist-Leninist brand of socialism.
TheBlackAdder
(28,160 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Busky, Donald F. (July 20, 2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. pp. 78. ISBN 978-0275968861. Democratic socialism is the wing of the socialist movement that combines a belief in a socially owned economy with that of political democracy. Sometimes simply called socialism, more often than not, the adjective democratic is added by democratic socialists to attempt to distinguish themselves from Communists who also call themselves socialists...democratic socialists wish to emphasize by their name that they disagree strongly with the Marxist-Leninist brand of socialism.
TheBlackAdder
(28,160 posts).
Besides, you fail to include what SBS states as HIS INTERPRETATION of Democratic Socialism.
The US already has a regulated capitalistic economy, political democracy (though now being restricted), and elements of a welfare state. This would just expand on some of the regulations that were in place in prior American governmental art, expand medical coverage beyond current art, and open up the voting elements which were restricted, expanded, and restricted though various states in American history.
Keep up with the obfuscation or blurred interpretations.
It's almost like conversing with an F. A. Hayek / Ayn Rand fan, so I don't waste much time doing so.
.
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Amd no academic in the poly-sci field anywhere in the world thinks it is. There may be one or two pier reviewed profs somewhere who think that but they would be as rare as the handful of climate scientists who dont believe inan made climate change.
TheBlackAdder
(28,160 posts)Paulie
(8,462 posts)It's about a third of a way in.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)I mean really, wtf?
pinebox
(5,761 posts)the bunkers will be built by the workers driving the red diggers from 1972.
In before lock.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Krytan11c
(271 posts)HE IS A COMMIE.
Fuck this red baiting shit. It's so played out and ridiculous.
"If we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men." Edward Murrow
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)Krytan11c
(271 posts)CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)Krytan11c
(271 posts)Made from, well....you know
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)What they don't realise is how badly that reflects on them.
What liberal doesn't know the difference between communism and democratic socialism?
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)Reading their posts is like watching Archie Bunker sometimes.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Old Codger
(4,205 posts)And desperation fill the air with the smell of bovine excrement, nothing substantial to discuss the red baiting will only get worse
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)We are going to take all of your money and all of your assets and give them to people who haven't even finished high school and make you clean their toilets. Oh and some of them don't have teeth. And some of them have a bit of a drinking problem. And some of them will probably tell you that you missed a spot.
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Is that some sort of pasta?
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)aidbo
(2,328 posts)Bernin4U
(812 posts)...when I read that. My surviving family members would not be too stoked.
Response to Bernin4U (Reply #54)
Bernin4U This message was self-deleted by its author.
amborin
(16,631 posts)SamKnause
(13,084 posts)How childish.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)Sweet Jesus, is this what it's come to?
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You're a teacher, isn't this covered in high school civics?
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)Of course it has to be covered delicately because teabagger parents will complain.
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)Yes, I said alert results. As in, someone actually alerted on your post. Enjoy:
On Fri Jan 29, 2016, 10:15 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Where did these people go to school?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1089237
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
The remarks attack the reputation, education, and intelligence of the poster.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Jan 29, 2016, 10:24 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Frivolous Alert.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Unless I missed a meeting, it is not against the goddamned rules to question the intelligence of someone who posts something stupid. Quit wasting my time with your partisan hackery.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: mild compared to most lately...
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Wtf?
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Thank you jurors!
arcane1
(38,613 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)That's the 4th 7-0 verdict on one of my posts in as many days.
The swarm is slipping.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)I just realized we both have Cute-thulhu's in our posts
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I'm getting the first one on a t-shirt.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)hedda_foil
(16,371 posts)Baby swarmers, so to speak.
brentspeak
(18,290 posts)as well as their state-run, anti-profit, commissar-controlled companies such as Nokia, Volvo, and Electrolux. Just the other day at Ikea, I saw employees with name badges that read "Comrade John" and "Political Officer Mary". Could of sworn I could hear gunshots executing rich people out back.
redwitch
(14,939 posts)The firing squads are so noisy!
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)could afford some damn silencers, right?
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,493 posts).
democrank
(11,082 posts)redwitch
(14,939 posts)And he was not too happy when Wall Street helped many Americans lose theirs. Someone should tell the person who started this obnoxious thread.
m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)hueymahl
(2,447 posts)Nothing else needs to be said!
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)doesn't seem like it.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Is your question a backhanded way of asking if Bernie Sanders is a communist? Trying to ring that bell again are we? Senators Shaheen and Granholm doing it wasn't good enough? Or maybe it died away sooner than y'all thought it would?
GeorgeGist
(25,308 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,570 posts)ShrimpPoboy
(301 posts)to the general public and distinguish it from the scary bits people think about when socialism is mentioned.
But on DU? Sad.
jalan48
(13,836 posts)G_j
(40,366 posts)sad..
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)He's trying to steal my essence. He's sapping my precious bodily fluids!
KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)The problem with the label socialist is it so freaking amorphous.
You have members here saying that if you support public roads you're a socialist. By that definition Adam Smith was a socialist.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Apparently not since this keeps happening.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,708 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)supporters here. It is a myth that Clinton supporters are civil. Many are many are not.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)SMC22307
(8,090 posts)This one is no exception.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Each socialist and communist state handles private property and the ownership of the means of production in a different way.
Sanders owns a condominium in Vermont worth about $100,000.00, so it appears he has no problem with private property. He supported a bill to immunize Gun Manufacturers against law suits, so he doesn't have a strong aversion to private ownership of the means of production.
Even if elected, no Congress would ever legislate the US into a Socialist State. Your house, and Sander's Condominium, will remain comfortably in the hands of you and your banker. For that to change would require a complete rewrite of the Constitution.
Disclaimer: I do not support Sanders for President. I find this topic ridiculous. I suggest reading "The Communist Manifesto" and then compare and contrast that with Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations.
Come back, then, and we can discuss the differences between of private property and the ownership of the means of production, and we will discuss the merits of both.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)Horse. Shit.
musicblind
(4,484 posts)Of course Bernie Sanders believes in private property. I'm sure he, like most Americans, owns private property.
Stuff like this is showcasing our worst sides. We are all members of the Democratic party and implying that one of our own does not support owning personal property is tempestuous at best.
delrem
(9,688 posts)Talking about flames...
You know what I liked about sitting around a campfire when I was a kid? Toasting marshmallows. Getting them to that point right before they catch on fire, then eating them.
A thing we did a few times was gather all the families together for a campfire at the lake, then we'd get out the wax milk cartons we'd saved and go down to the shore and light the spouts on fire and set them down in the water, and they'd all float out to the center of the lake.
Sanders just wants all people to have medical care as a right. As would be guaranteed with a universal single payer plan.
He wants all children to have higher education as a right.
This doesn't mean that the rich won't be allowed to employ private doctors, above and beyond universal coverage. But it does mean that a very high bar can be set with respect to expected coverage. It also means that expected coverage can be expanded via community clinics, when given a strong nucleus of care-givers working to a common purpose. It takes the matter of life and death out of the hands of a private insurance industry and puts it in the hands of the people, right down to community level outreach.
Likewise for education. There always has been and there always will be very elite private tutors for those who can pay.
I don't think Sanders wants to take anything away from anybody, except from those who want to pay absolutely no taxes for the betterment of the people. Just taxes for war, then? For corruption? Maybe taxation has to be modified only a very little, if taxes were better distributed. Maybe taxes should be purposed LESS toward the military and continued war, which only provides ground for war profiteering?
Ah, I still remember the olden days, setting those lit milk cartons down to float away.
guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Senator Sanders, are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?
That is what you actually wanted to say, is it not?
Bernin4U
(812 posts)Trying to get Bernie elected by making Hillary supporters look like complete jerks?
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Completely?
SDJay
(1,089 posts)Your new required head wear:
[link:[IMG][/IMG]|
frylock
(34,825 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)The early advocates of Socialism (Fourier, Owen, Blanc, and Tristan) had only two democratic societies to compare their models on, The United States and the Republic of France. The rest of the world was Monarchies and Theocracies.
Socialism was drempt up to counter the excesses of Victorian England and other Monarchies during the early industrial revolution.
We are the base model proving socialism works.
cali
(114,904 posts)Informed voter who hasn't bothered to learn about all the candidates, or you're just red/flame baiting.
I totally doubt the former but just in case, here is the answer:
Yes, Bernie believes in private property every bit as much as FDR, for example.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)And there's no response yet? Are DU Adminstrstirs are going to allow this to stand?
treestar
(82,383 posts)Like most American liberals, he is for capitalism with a safety net. Though right wingers will call that "Marxism" or "Communism," it is not really even "Socialism." The government would not own the means of production, so it's not socialism. Which is odd as many of his supporters here might not like the concept that Bernie is OK with "capitalism."
Vinca
(50,236 posts)Is your last name McCarthy?
sinkingfeeling
(51,434 posts)Internet search and read what democratic socialism means. Here's the answer to your rather ignorant question: http://www.dsausa.org/what_is_democratic_socialism
QC
(26,371 posts)the thought that a regular participant here might honestly not know the difference between a social democrat and a communist, or the possibility that someone here might knowingly and deliberately engage in McCarthyism for the sake of trying to make some kind of point.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Somewhere in the past, I used to like you ...
That was before I saw your penchant for cynical and fallacious pleadings ...
Now I see who you really are ... Shocking ...
Gone
VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)Democratic Socialism. For the people, by the people. Wikipedia is your friend; why don't you bloody educate yourself?
floriduck
(2,262 posts)their 401(k) savings when the banks, investment companies and insurance companies lose those funds due to their own criminal negligence? Is this really the game you want to play?
Autumn
(44,962 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)what they call "personal property"?
In other words, just how deep does your ignorance really go?
hoosierlib
(710 posts)He's not an effing communist...
Pretty simple breakdown of economic models:
Laissez-faire Capitalism is one extreme (private ownership of all property with no government regulation) and Authoritarian Communism on the other (public ownership of all property with government regulation all commerce and industries). Socialism is somewhere in the middle...
Bernie wants to slides us towards to a more regulated model, in line with what we had before the 1970's. Pretty simple to understand.
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)You are either being deliberately obtuse, or you have been paying zero attention for the past 6 months.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)Ron Green
(9,822 posts)Two hat tips for this one!
Romulox
(25,960 posts)whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)At least I hope you're joking. Please don't operate any heavy machinery.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)Colonel Flagg: This won't look good on your record.
Frank Burns: But Colonel, it's just Reader's Digest.
Colonel Flagg: Not if you eliminate the third, fifth, and sixth letters, then it's Red's Digest, comrade.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)neverforget
(9,436 posts)GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)Mike__M
(1,052 posts)Heddi
(18,312 posts)I am totally in love with you for this
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)You should feel ashamed. But then you are an H supporter so that explains that.
karynnj
(59,494 posts)and - as seen - he does have assets.
PS All the Scandinavian countries he has mentioned have private property -- and I suspect you know this.
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)thinking it thru, if talking about real property (land)
What happens when teaparty takes over everthing and sells Yellowstone, Yosemite and Waikiki Beach to the Koch bros?
Still like private land ownership?
Private property doesnt mean only real property.
Maybe you should ask about REAL property, which is land, which is what I am talking about.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)then pack you off to internment camps for "re-education".
He's also going to confiscate your dog Muffy, and barbecue Muffy to feed the insatiable appetite of the freeloading hordes!
Thank the lord that Hillary Rodham Clinton hasn't a progressive bone in her body, because the commies are coming and she's the last hope to stand against them!
TheFarS1de
(1,017 posts)then yes , he does . FFS I better check under my bed . Op is about 60 years late to the party .
steve2470
(37,457 posts)delrem
(9,688 posts)And barbecue it with all the other dogs it confiscates, to feed the rabid freeloading hordes!
Yes he does! He wants to barbecue your dog Muffy!
And he's going to send in the gendarmes to confiscate your barbecue sauce! Give it to the same rabid swarming hordes! Be afraid, arely, be very very afraid!
BainsBane
(53,010 posts)Just because he calls himself a socialist doesn't make it true.
He isn't even critical of all corporations or of capital generally. His critiques are directed against Wall Street, while he has showed himself willing to grant immunity to gun corporations, supported paying $800 billion to Lockheed Martin for the disastrous f-35, and voted for subsidies to sugar corporations. For some reason, his concerns are limited to financial institutions on a single street in Manhattan. In fact, he seems to have a particular problem with Goldman Sachs, yet never mentions other investment banks. His outrage is highly selective.
Though your post does reflect the sort of thing we are likely to see from the GOP should he become the nominee.
neverforget
(9,436 posts)DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)It really does take all kinds.
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)And it kinda looks like 'Spalini!!!'
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)Killed a shit- ton of Iraqi babies.
Would that make Hillary a baby killer?????
Posting, BC the admins are still allowing this shit free play here
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Seeing a lot of it the last couple days. Her supporters are on a desperate rampage.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Maybe that is why he does not have the support of some hard core leftists, it does not appear that he will not work to destroy the capitalist system in favour of a social ownership model.