Obama's Great Leap Forward

[MachZer0]

Is that an admission that you don't know what Marxism is?

Is that YOUR admission that you don't know what Marxism is?

 

[Redac]

Is that YOUR admission that you don't know what Marxism is?

Have you not read the gigantic darned posts I wrote not 10 posts ago?

 

[A2SG]

I'll only comment on the one name - Allen West. Honest? To accuse other members of Congress as being card carrying Communists is honest?

I'm happy for the comedic effect you provide HawkEye. Thanks.

Remember when West claimed he had a higher security clearance than the President?

-- A2SG, yeah, he's keeping the party honest all right.....

 

[MachZer0]

Have you not read the gigantic darned posts I wrote not 10 posts ago?

The ones that seem to beat around the bush? I was hoping for something a little more succinct

 

[Redac]

The ones that seem to beat around the bush? I was hoping for something a little more succinct

How in the heck was I "beating around the bush?" By discussing at length Marxism and some of it's tenets? Seriously?

 

[MachZer0]

How in the heck was I "beating around the bush?" By discussing at length Marxism and some of it's tenets? Seriously?

The request was for a definition, not examples of some of its tenets. Have you got one?

 

[Redac]

The request was for a definition, not examples of some of its tenets. Have you got one?

Are you suggesting that an ideology is defined by something other than it's tenets?

ETA: moreover, are you suggesting that I would know an ideology's tenets without knowing what it is?

 

[MachZer0]

Are you suggesting that an ideology is defined by something other than it's tenets?

ETA: moreover, are you suggesting that I would know an ideology's tenets without knowing what it is?

Not by some of it's tenets, no. Surely you have an actual definition

 

[Redac]

Not by some of it's tenets, no. Surely you have an actual definition

A definition without tenets? Check post 295, it's not hard to find.

 

[RETS]

He wants healthcare for children......oops

LOL! No worries, my friend. Like I said, I needed that laugh. I knew what you meant, but it was awesome to see the typo and have an excellent belly laugh!

Remember when West claimed he had a higher security clearance than the President?

-- A2SG, yeah, he's keeping the party honest all right.....

I know a man who once did have that clearance, and there are people who do. It is done so that the President has plausible deniability- Should he be needed for a decision, it is presented in such a way that he knows nothing of the actual "operation," and only the barest minimum of information.

That being said, I doubt West has that kind of clearance, or ever will, for that matter.



Redac, I saw your post, my friend, and I will respond later on today. It's past two and I'm going to TRY and get some sleep, as I have a men's ministry breakfast at 8:30. I'll get back to you afterwards. God bless, and I'll "see" you then.

 

[A2SG]

I know a man who once did have that clearance, and there are people who do. It is done so that the President has plausible deniability- Should he be needed for a decision, it is presented in such a way that he knows nothing of the actual "operation," and only the barest minimum of information.

A President may not be told everything, but his security clearance is still the highest there is. No one can have a security clearance higher than the President.

"The president is the one who established the security clearance system by executive order," said Steven Aftergood, a national security and intelligence specialist with the Federation of American Scientists. "Therefore it is nonsensical to speak of clearances higher than what the president has. As head of the executive branch and commander in chief of the armed forces, there is no information in government that could be denied to the president for security reasons if he determined he needed access to that information."​

That being said, I doubt West has that kind of clearance, or ever will, for that matter.

I'd say that's a given.

-- A2SG, but he is good for a laugh or two.....

 

[Redac]

Redac, I saw your post, my friend, and I will respond later on today. It's past two and I'm going to TRY and get some sleep, as I have a men's ministry breakfast at 8:30. I'll get back to you afterwards. God bless, and I'll "see" you then.

No worries, man. I'm enjoying our discussion, but I'm in no rush. Have a good one.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Marxism is a bold-faced lie. It presents noble and lofty goals for society, but it has no substance on which to build a society.

That is a definition of Marxism. It's also a repetition of what I've already said.

It's a repetition of what you keep saying. It is not, however, a definition. To present Obama as a Marxist, one must show some understanding of the concept Marxism, and then show that Obama adheres to that concept in a way that logically makes him a Marxist. Thus far, the best evidence that has been presented has been a fallacy: the guilt-by-association fallacy. The next best evidence appeals to the view that certain policies that Obama endorses are "Marxist". But no effort has been made to show precisely how, beyond the mere opinions of those inclined to believe it, such policies can be called "Marxist". The next best evidence? An innocuous campaign slogan that has been used at various times by politicians of various political persuasions.

 

[A2SG]

The next best evidence? An innocuous campaign slogan that has been used at various times by politicians of various political persuasions.

You mean like this Commie?

-- A2SG, no wonder he went to China.....

 

[Ernst Junger]

well, he obviously couldn't keep pretending to be not the incumbant and responsible for this mess.

 

[NightHawkeye]

The next best evidence? An innocuous campaign slogan that has been used at various times by politicians of various political persuasions.

If by various political persuasions you mean Marxists, communists and socialists, then I agree with you. If other political persuasions have used this campaign slogan, then please tell when and where it was used. Thanks.

 

[Vylo]

If by various political persuasions you mean Marxists, communists and socialists, then I agree with you. If other political persuasions have used this campaign slogan, then please tell when and where it was used. Thanks.

It is literally 2 posts above yours.

 

[NightHawkeye]

It is literally 2 posts above yours.

LOL ... even Little Green Footballs concedes that Nixon mighta been Marxist: Little Green Footballs - Was Richard M. Nixon a Closet Marxist: Forward Together

We know with certainty that Nixon believed: "The end justifies the means". We know with certainty that Nixon handed over South Vietnam to the communists. We know with certainty that Nixon was able to communicate effectively with the communist Chinese.

We know with certainty that Nixon was loudly and repeatedly accused of being a "tyrant", and not without justification I might add.

So ... if you're conceding that Barack Hussein Obama is equivalent in the presidency to Richard Milhouse Nixon, then I won't argue with that at all. I agree.

 

[Vylo]

Moving goalposts much?

Here then:

 

[NightHawkeye]

Moving goalposts much?

Here then:

NHE adds "progressives" to the list. No big surprise there.

Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives. What other political persuasions?