Campaign 2008

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

You've got to seriously be kidding me, Marvin. I can't even respond to how fucking dumb you are. Again, sorry Agent, but Jesus Christ you are a piece of fucking shit.

 

You can't deny the Socialist blog on his website even if its not got any posts.

 

and meanwhile

 

BREAKING NEWS

 

Government is buying into banks using money from the bailout bill...

[Guest Vitamin X]

Ugh. Ignore him. Please.

[BUTT 0]

Marvin, anyone can set up a blog on the Obama site. It doesn't mean Obama is in league with the Socialists, it doesn't even mean that they're supporting him, and there's no way of knowing if it's even really a representative of that party. I'm sure McCain has some disreputable supporters as well.

[Nightwing 0]

Marvin, anyone can set up a blog on the Obama site. It doesn't mean Obama is in league with the Socialists, it doesn't even mean that they're supporting him, and there's no way of knowing if it's even really a representative of that party. I'm sure McCain has some disreputable supporters as well.

I can't remember his name, but one of the CNN analysts was on Colbert talking about how McCain needs to rein Palin in. He talked about how, at Palin rallies, Obama has been called a terrorist, people have shouted to kill him, and a black cameraman had "racial epithets" hurled at him. I wonder if Marvin was one of them...

 

Government is buying into banks using money from the bailout bill...

 

OMG SOCIALIST DOOMSDAY APPROACHING~! ROMNEY, WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN US?!

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

Marvin, anyone can set up a blog on the Obama site. It doesn't mean Obama is in league with the Socialists, it doesn't even mean that they're supporting him, and there's no way of knowing if it's even really a representative of that party. I'm sure McCain has some disreputable supporters as well.

 

The Democratic Socialists of America supported his State Senate run in 1996 and he made a speech at a Chicago DSA meeting.

 

but hey, that was like..12 years ago.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Government is buying into banks using money from the bailout bill...

 

OMG SOCIALIST DOOMSDAY APPROACHING~! ROMNEY, WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN US?!

 

To defend Marvin here for one second, I've actually heard multiple people claim that the government buying into banks would lead this country to socialism. These are people I work with and I (normally) think very highly of their opinions. This is a scary proposition for a lot of people.

[Nightwing 0]

Government is buying into banks using money from the bailout bill...

 

OMG SOCIALIST DOOMSDAY APPROACHING~! ROMNEY, WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN US?!

 

To defend Marvin here for one second, I've actually heard multiple people claim that the government buying into banks would lead this country to socialism. These are people I work with and I (normally) think very highly of their opinions. This is a scary proposition for a lot of people.

 

Nothing is leading this country into socialism. It's either a hilarious scare tactic used by idiots like Marvin, or people who simply don't recognize that this country, for better or for worse, is never going to be socialist. The public is almost completely against such ideas. The only reason this was proposed and actually being used is because of the emergency factor here.

 

Believing that this is going to be the rule rather than the exception isn't looking at the ideological realities of America. We are far more classically liberal than any other country in the world, and I don't see that stopping any time soon.

[ZGangsta 0]

Man, remember the good ol days when Marvin would just post about how sad his life was and everyone would try and encourage him.

[The Niggardly King 0]

BREAKING NEWS

Government is buying into banks using money from the bailout bill...

 

Oh fuck we done... The New World Order is coming... and there is only one man who can stop them...

 

Ron Paul...

 

Don't fall for the Illumnatti.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Yeah, screw the credit system! And the federal serve! And you know what, fuck the gold standard, too, and all paper currency! Let's get back to bartering and trading. I'm a pretty skilled negotiator, I can make it big that way.

[NoCalMike 0]

You know what really scares me as I re-watched the debate and the sound-bites afterward. Obama and McCain were nominated basically as a referendum on Iraq and the war against radical Islam. The government issue was the last thing on anyone's plate at the time and now look where we are. Do either one of them have a real good plan that's going to work and get us out of this mess? I'm not convinced. Maybe it's because I'm so angry at both of them I'm ready to just throw them all out and start over, but neither one of them make me feel like they're going to solve this. Especially Obama, his "I'm not raising taxes on 95% of you" could be his version of "Read My Lips."

 

Here you go, ready?

 

McCain: We're not getting out until we achieve "Victory" in which I have not clearly defined, and is subject to change.

 

Obama: We must get out of Iraq, so we can get into Afganistan.

 

Be prepared for Dissapointment, oh yes.

[NoCalMike 0]

Not that I actively promote the use of any "ism" but if everyone agrees the definition of "facism" closely matches the quote below.....

 

(From Wiki)

 

Fascism is a totalitarian nationalist and corporatist ideology. It is primarily concerned with notions and perceived problems associated with cultural, economic, political, and social decline or decadence, and which seeks to solve such problems by achieving a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation, as well as promoting cults of unity, strength and purity.

 

Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: nationalism (including national socialism, national syndicalism, along with collectivism, mysticism and populism based on the nationalist values); corporatism (including class collaboration, economic planning, mixed economy, and third way); totalitarianism (including dictatorship, holism, major social interventionism, and statism); and militarism.Fascism opposes communism, conservatism, liberalism, and international socialism

 

Then I would say we have been heading this "direction" over the last eight years more than anything else. I think people have kind of the wrong idea about what Facism is, because it is so closely associated with Hitler & The Nazis, so unless we see a group marching around with swastikas then it must not be, like unless we literally have a guy with a goofy mustache screaming German from a megaphone then it's ok.

 

From my understanding, "Facism" is more about corporate control of the government, and I think that is pretty much the direction we are headed.

[NoCalMike 0]

Stories like these McCain booed after trying to calm anti-Obama crowd have me feeling bad for McCain for about a half a second, until I realize it is really his campaigns own fault. If they choose to go around claiming Obama is "paling around with terrorist" "has extremist ties" etc etc etc, then these is the kind of crazy nutjobs that are going to turn out for his rallies.

 

I also get a kick out of the "We love america more than you" right-wing loons. They feel they have to prove how much they love america, by randomly breaking out into "God Bless America" at any moment, because you know that shows you :heart: america ZE~MOSTEST!!! It's just old and I thought these people would climb back under, and STAY under their rocks after 2004.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

It's good that McCain finally said something to try and take the hate out of the campaign. Maybe he'd be well served to call off the Palin fear rallys...but she seems to be in her own orbit at this point.

[At Home 0]

woops

[NoCalMike 0]

It's good that McCain finally said something to try and take the hate out of the campaign. Maybe he'd be well served to call off the Palin fear rallys...but she seems to be in her own orbit at this point.

 

Yeah pretty much, I mean by the way the crowds are acting, it seems they are mostly their to listen to Palin's "red meat" dialogue then ask any actual concrete questions of John McCain anyway.

 

I mean really, questions like "When are you going to take the gloves off" On what ISSUE Exactly?

 

Oh you mean, when are you going to dumb-down your campaign EVEN MORE, by calling Obama a terrorist HIMSELF?

[Art Sandusky 0]

When your only way out of a mess is to attack your own supporters, you need Jesus because no one's going to like you then.

[Nightwing 0]

I think you are off-base with the comparison, especially the idea of "Corporate Control of Government", which is not even close to what Fascism is. The Government is the supreme ruler in Fascism, not Corporations. Not even hardly. Corporations only exist at the whims of the government, and will likely be serving some good for the government. "National Socialism" is perhaps the best way to term it, since it is a very socialist system with very xenophobic habits. Thusly it is divorced from socialism and communism in that fascism is much more focused on an individual ethnicity, while the latter two are all-inclusive. But in practice, they have very similar policies regarding the side of the populace they like.

 

I think you are confusing corporations with corporatism. I'd argue we are going back towards a more laissez-faire economic system (something that Corporatism is against) along with a more nationalistic bent. Perhaps you could call it a "mini-Gilded Age".

 

But Fascism? I think you need to read the whole entry on that page, NoCal.

[NoCalMike 0]

I think you are off-base with the comparison, especially the idea of "Corporate Control of Government", which is not even close to what Fascism is. The Government is the supreme ruler in Fascism, not Corporations. Not even hardly. Corporations only exist at the whims of the government, and will likely be serving some good for the government. "National Socialism" is perhaps the best way to term it, since it is a very socialist system with very xenophobic habits. Thusly it is divorced from socialism and communism in that fascism is much more focused on an individual ethnicity, while the latter two are all-inclusive. But in practice, they have very similar policies regarding the side of the populace they like.

 

I think you are confusing corporations with corporatism. I'd argue we are going back towards a more laissez-faire economic system (something that Corporatism is against) along with a more nationalistic bent. Perhaps you could call it a "mini-Gilded Age".

 

But Fascism? I think you need to read the whole entry on that page, NoCal.

 

Well Yes, yes I do indeed.

 

Like I said, I don't like using "isms" period, because of how our system is really kind of unique no matter form it has taken on over it's history. I guess you could actually say there are elements of a lot of "isms" in it, but not enough of one or the other to make it an "ism"

 

huh?

[At Home 0]

Fascism stuff

 

Mike, your opinions on this matter are wrong. You have no idea what a fascist government looks like. The United States is FAR from a fascist government, no matter how you look at it. That is all that needs to be said on this matter, and no more.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I think you are off-base with the comparison, especially the idea of "Corporate Control of Government", which is not even close to what Fascism is. The Government is the supreme ruler in Fascism, not Corporations. Not even hardly. Corporations only exist at the whims of the government, and will likely be serving some good for the government. "National Socialism" is perhaps the best way to term it, since it is a very socialist system with very xenophobic habits. Thusly it is divorced from socialism and communism in that fascism is much more focused on an individual ethnicity, while the latter two are all-inclusive. But in practice, they have very similar policies regarding the side of the populace they like.

 

I think you are confusing corporations with corporatism. I'd argue we are going back towards a more laissez-faire economic system (something that Corporatism is against) along with a more nationalistic bent. Perhaps you could call it a "mini-Gilded Age".

 

But Fascism? I think you need to read the whole entry on that page, NoCal.

 

Well Yes, yes I do indeed.

 

Like I said, I don't like using "isms" period, because of how our system is really kind of unique no matter form it has taken on over it's history. I guess you could actually say there are elements of a lot of "isms" in it, but not enough of one or the other to make it an "ism"

 

huh?

 

The last 8 years have been "retardism"

[Gary Floyd 0]

Not that I actively promote the use of any "ism" but if everyone agrees the definition of "facism" closely matches the quote below.....

 

(From Wiki)

 

Fascism is a totalitarian nationalist and corporatist ideology. It is primarily concerned with notions and perceived problems associated with cultural, economic, political, and social decline or decadence, and which seeks to solve such problems by achieving a millenarian national rebirth by exalting the nation, as well as promoting cults of unity, strength and purity.

 

Various scholars attribute different characteristics to fascism, but the following elements are usually seen as its integral parts: nationalism (including national socialism, national syndicalism, along with collectivism, mysticism and populism based on the nationalist values); corporatism (including class collaboration, economic planning, mixed economy, and third way); totalitarianism (including dictatorship, holism, major social interventionism, and statism); and militarism.Fascism opposes communism, conservatism, liberalism, and international socialism

 

Then I would say we have been heading this "direction" over the last eight years more than anything else. I think people have kind of the wrong idea about what Facism is, because it is so closely associated with Hitler & The Nazis, so unless we see a group marching around with swastikas then it must not be, like unless we literally have a guy with a goofy mustache screaming German from a megaphone then it's ok.

 

From my understanding, "Facism" is more about corporate control of the government, and I think that is pretty much the direction we are headed.

[Guest]

Government is buying into banks using money from the bailout bill...

 

OMG SOCIALIST DOOMSDAY APPROACHING~! ROMNEY, WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN US?!

 

To defend Marvin here for one second, I've actually heard multiple people claim that the government buying into banks would lead this country to socialism. These are people I work with and I (normally) think very highly of their opinions. This is a scary proposition for a lot of people.

 

Nothing is leading this country into socialism. It's either a hilarious scare tactic used by idiots like Marvin, or people who simply don't recognize that this country, for better or for worse, is never going to be socialist. The public is almost completely against such ideas. The only reason this was proposed and actually being used is because of the emergency factor here

The government sticking their feet into the market and making attempts to take stakes in private banks is, in fact, a move towards even larger government...yes, socialism. What else would you call it? I'm not saying we will have a socialist government or anything of the sort, but nationalizing the market, you bet these moves over the last few weeks have been socialist courses of action.

 

Don't you think private investors are going to get out of the market rather than fight with the government for shares? Who do you think is going to buy shares at that point, when no private capital is being injected into the market? The United States of America. This country has nationalized portions of the banking system. It's insane.

[Guest]

The public is almost completely against such ideas. The only reason this was proposed and actually being used is because of the emergency factor here

And as for this part of your comment, uh, hello out there? The public was against the bailout, against money being given to AIG after their retreat soon after getting 85 billion, is against the Fed's move to pour upwards of 1.5 trillion into the market (by pour, I mean run the printing press)...what's going to stop the government from doing this too? Everything the government has done thus far, the public's been against it. The vaunted emergency factor has been the reason all along. What they think is best for the market is best for us too, and we should just give them opportunities to do as they please.

 

Some of you people need to wake the fuck up. This government doesn't give a shit what we think. They will save the market at any cost, whether they should or shouldn't. Whatever it takes. And if it means our taxes are raised, well, that's just too bad for us. If the bailout doesn't work, that's too fucking bad as well.

[panthermatt7 0]

Stories like these McCain booed after trying to calm anti-Obama crowd have me feeling bad for McCain for about a half a second, until I realize it is really his campaigns own fault. If they choose to go around claiming Obama is "paling around with terrorist" "has extremist ties" etc etc etc, then these is the kind of crazy nutjobs that are going to turn out for his rallies.

 

Honestly, though, the hatred for Obama makes a LOT of sense. Not because he actually deserves it, but because every action causes an equal and opposite reaction. As people hail Obama as the next uniting political figure, a savior of American politics, and a worldwide cultural phenomenon -- and even write hymns about him (

) -- there are going to be people that don't WANT the same brand of change he promises, and have the same degree of disdain for him as his supporters' admiration.

 

The biggest issue is that people can't take a deep breath, remove themselves, step back and realize that they're both politicians. All campaign promises, slogans and songs aside, they're both cut from the same mold: they will make whatever promises are necessary to ultimately achieve election.

[Nightwing 0]

Fascism stuff

 

Mike, your opinions on this matter are wrong. You have no idea what a fascist government looks like. The United States is FAR from a fascist government, no matter how you look at it. That is all that needs to be said on this matter, and no more.

 

I always felt the easiest way of debunking whole "fascism" thing was to point to the fact that MoveOn.org still exists and is (arguably) stronger than ever. There is no way such an entity can exist in a fascist government.

 

But regardless, I think Mike's realized his mistake. No need to harp on it; at least he admitted it, unlike some people...

 

The government sticking their feet into the market and making attempts to take stakes in private banks is, in fact, a move towards even larger government...yes, socialism. What else would you call it? I'm not saying we will have a socialist government or anything of the sort, but nationalizing the market, you bet these moves over the last few weeks have been socialist courses of action.

 

Don't you think private investors are going to get out of the market rather than fight with the government for shares? Who do you think is going to buy shares at that point, when no private capital is being injected into the market? The United States of America. This country has nationalized portions of the banking system. It's insane.

 

I won't deny the socialist bent in such policies. But I don't think it's anything more than an emergency tactic, and I don't think it will lead to socialism. We survived the New Deal without becoming socialists, I don't see any reason to think this will suddenly put us over the edge. Hell, there were a fair amount of people still calling for FDR's head during his administration, and there are arguably even more today. Values-wise, America won't become socialist because classical liberalism is so ingrained with our views on government power and such.

 

And I don't think that this is going to chase private investment out of the market, either; I think this will stabilize things enough to give people confidence in investing private capital again. Do you think people are busting down the doors to invest money in the market right now? This measure is to give people confidence to put their money back in the market, since the government is going to have more stake and more control over the current economic crisis. By your scenario, we'll be seeing private capital evaporate into nothing with this plan, which is the opposite of what I think is intended and what is going to happen.

[Guest]

The government sticking their feet into the market and making attempts to take stakes in private banks is, in fact, a move towards even larger government...yes, socialism. What else would you call it? I'm not saying we will have a socialist government or anything of the sort, but nationalizing the market, you bet these moves over the last few weeks have been socialist courses of action.

 

Don't you think private investors are going to get out of the market rather than fight with the government for shares? Who do you think is going to buy shares at that point, when no private capital is being injected into the market? The United States of America. This country has nationalized portions of the banking system. It's insane.

And I don't think that this is going to chase private investment out of the market, either; I think this will stabilize things enough to give people confidence in investing private capital again. Do you think people are busting down the doors to invest money in the market right now? This measure is to give people confidence to put their money back in the market, since the government is going to have more stake and more control over the current economic crisis. By your scenario, we'll be seeing private capital evaporate into nothing with this plan, which is the opposite of what I think is intended and what is going to happen.

I got a little upset during my last post, so I'll apologize before I get to this.

 

I don't think private capital will evaporate after this, but I've got a big, giant problem with the government taking control in this situation. We've tried everything to give investors confidence thus far. Nothing has worked. In addition, the government is going to be taking control with taxpayer money, I don't want any part of that. This whole situation isn't the American people's fault. We're taking it from behind. We've gotta pay for this too. Higher taxes for everyone! Regardless of who's in office.

 

I also have a problem with an unchecked Capitol Hill after the election. I know it'll be Democrats in the majority, but we need government to be checked right now. It's already getting way out of hand. The Democrats have bent over for the Bush Administration, I'm really worried about what they'll do for Barack Obama, or rather, what bills they'll introduce for him to sign.

 

This world would be a better place if the Democratic Congress showed some balls and stepped up to Bush.

[Nightwing 0]

The public is almost completely against such ideas. The only reason this was proposed and actually being used is because of the emergency factor here

And as for this part of your comment, uh, hello out there? The public was against the bailout, against money being given to AIG after their retreat soon after getting 85 billion, is against the Fed's move to pour upwards of 1.5 trillion into the market (by pour, I mean run the printing press)...what's going to stop the government from doing this too? Everything the government has done thus far, the public's been against it. The vaunted emergency factor has been the reason all along. What they think is best for the market is best for us too, and we should just give them opportunities to do as they please.

 

Are you saying that, due to this economic crisis, the American Government is going to go from "Market" to "Socialist" in a heartbeat? Again, I point to the New Deal, and the fact that we aren't socialists after that. Explain to me how this is any different.

 

I don't see the fear of a new "socialist" government. We've been through this before, and we didn't become the USSA.

 

Some of you people need to wake the fuck up. This government doesn't give a shit what we think. They will save the market at any cost, whether they should or shouldn't. Whatever it takes. And if it means our taxes are raised, well, that's just too bad for us. If the bailout doesn't work, that's too fucking bad as well.

 

Are you suggesting they just let the market fail? Don't you think that could have worse results?

[panthermatt7 0]

Fascism stuff

 

Mike, your opinions on this matter are wrong. You have no idea what a fascist government looks like. The United States is FAR from a fascist government, no matter how you look at it. That is all that needs to be said on this matter, and no more.

 

People generally want to view corporate America and the government as mutually exclusive beings. Thus, when people hear of the government stepping in to bail out (or run) corporations, you hear them deride it as 'socialism.' On the flip side, when corporate America is seen to be influencing specifics in the government -- i.e. Dick Cheney's entire vice presidency -- you hear cries of 'fascism.'

 

In reality, we're nowhere close to both. However, when an element of either is introduced, you'll hear it from both parties.

 

[NoCalMike 0]

Stories like these McCain booed after trying to calm anti-Obama crowd have me feeling bad for McCain for about a half a second, until I realize it is really his campaigns own fault. If they choose to go around claiming Obama is "paling around with terrorist" "has extremist ties" etc etc etc, then these is the kind of crazy nutjobs that are going to turn out for his rallies.

 

Honestly, though, the hatred for Obama makes a LOT of sense. Not because he actually deserves it, but because every action causes an equal and opposite reaction. As people hail Obama as the next uniting political figure, a savior of American politics, and a worldwide cultural phenomenon -- and even write hymns about him (

) -- there are going to be people that don't WANT the same brand of change he promises, and have the same degree of disdain for him as his supporters' admiration.

 

The biggest issue is that people can't take a deep breath, remove themselves, step back and realize that they're both politicians. All campaign promises, slogans and songs aside, they're both cut from the same mold: they will make whatever promises are necessary to ultimately achieve election.

 

 

That is a good point. I guess for everyone looking for "change" there is going to be someone else that wants the opposite and is going to cling even harder to the ways of old.

 

I think Obama represents "change" less-so on economic or foreign policy driven issues but the changing of America's culture itself, it's people, it's tolerance, maybe more when it comes to social issues, so the people that don't like what they see are clinging to what they have left.

 

Some people might see him as a product of multi-culturalism and they hate THAT and are afraid of it, and want it to go away.