Obama's Great Leap Forward

[NightHawkeye]

Unfortunately, the right commandeered the term "progressive" to add to their big scary boogeyman closet, like Marxist, Socialist, Communist, etc.

That's why so many people of those ideological persuasions tend to be afraid to admit it openly. The right has turned them into meaning evil, terrible things that must be stopped at all costs - ironically close to Hitler's justification for murdering Jews, socialists, communists, gypsies, etc.

Glad you brought that up again ... always good to back to the OP ...

Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Nixon, Bush II ... now Obama.

All verified associations ...

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

Glad you brought that up again ... always good to back to the OP ...

Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Nixon, Bush II ... now Obama.

All verified associations ...

I find it disturbing, Hawk, the lengths you will go to and the people you will throw under the bus just to cling to this ridiculously absurd (and consistently disproven) idea that the President is a communist/Marxist/socialist simply because of his use of "Forward" in a campaign slogan.

Tell me...if Rick Santorum or Ron Paul used "forward" as a campaign slogan, would you brand them communists/Marxists/socialists too?

 

[NightHawkeye]

I find it disturbing, Hawk, the lengths you will go to and the people you will throw under the bus just to cling to this ridiculously absurd (and consistently disproven) idea that the President is a communist/Marxist/socialist simply because of his use of "Forward" in a campaign slogan.

Huh? You consistently misrepresent my position.

I called Obama a Marxist/socialist long before he came out with his new campaign slogan this week.

Glenn Beck presents the Obama National Anthem - YouTube

I'm glad he's come out of the closet though.

Tell me...if Rick Santorum or Ron Paul used "forward" as a campaign slogan, would you brand them communists/Marxists/socialists too?

Why are you trying to smear Rick Santorum and Ron Paul? Have they done any such thing?

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

Huh? You consistently misrepresent my position.

I called Obama a Marxist/socialist long before he came out with his new campaign slogan this week.

So? What's that got to do with anything? You still said that this new campaign slogan is an indicator that he is a communist because of the word "Forward". I'm not misrepresenting your position.

Why are you trying to smear Rick Santorum and Ron Paul? Have they done any such thing?

Just answer the question I'm not going to play this game with you today.

 

[NightHawkeye]

So? What's that got to do with anything? You still said that this new campaign slogan is an indicator that he is a communist because of the word "Forward". I'm not misrepresenting your position.

Yes, you most certainly did misrepresent my position. Here's what you said:

I find it disturbing, Hawk, the lengths you will go to and the people you will throw under the bus just to cling to this ridiculously absurd (and consistently disproven) idea that the President is a communist/Marxist/socialist simply because of his use of "Forward" in a campaign slogan.

I even highlighted the relevant wording. Words have meaning, CurlyFries.

Obama's been Marxist/socialist/communist all his life. Why try to deny that? I find it refreshing that he's finally come out of the closet with his ideology. Embrace it ... or be repelled by it. Your choice.

Just answer the question I'm not going to play this game with you today.

Hope that clarifies for you, CurlyFries.

 

[stamperben]

The problem is you HAVE to look to the past in order to learn how best to work your future. History has taught us lessons on most everything, but we never study it and look at it on the left, because we get just as uppity as the righties about our moral/ideological superiority and act like our ideas are foolproof.

Looking to the future is GREAT, and necessary...but NOT at the cost of avoiding the past. Don't let regressive righties fool you into thinking history is worthless.

Much can be learned from history. It is far from worthless.

My problem with regressive conservatives and the past has to do with the Winston Churchill take on the famous saying: "Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it." Progressives do know the past and the mistakes that were made, and unlike the conservatives, vow not to make those mistakes again.

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

Yes, you most certainly did misrepresent my position. Here's what you said:

I even highlighted the relevant wording. Words have meaning, CurlyFries.

Did you not say that his use of "Forward" in a campaign slogan was an indicator of his communism/Marxism/socialism?

Obama's been Marxist/socialist/communist all his life. Why try to deny that?

Because there's no evidence of it. None. And any time you are asked for evidence you point to a list of names, most of whom are only Marxist/communist/socialist because Glenn Beck said so (but in reality are nothing of the sort).

Your ideology is incredibly unstable, Hawk, and I'm concerned for YOU. I do believe you're a good person at heart who means well, but this is a path of disaster. You have GOT to put less stock in figures like Beck and put MORE stock in, as you consistently claim to follow, the TRUTH.

If you can't give someone a concrete definition of your enemy's ideology immediately when prompted, it should be a good indication that you need to study that ideology more - and NOT from sources you think you can trust, but from a VARIETY of sources, including the works of Marx himself.

And if you can't give someone a concrete, sourced reason for your enemy following said ideology, it should be a good indication that you've either misjudged your enemy or you've misjudged the ideology you claim he/she follows.

But no enemy is worth losing the respect people have for you and your ideas.

Just the truth, Hawk, from a person who cares about you, regardless of whether we agree

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

My problem with regressive conservatives and the past has to do with the Winston Churchill take on the famous saying: "Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it."

I'm unaware of the instance you're speaking of. Clarify?

Progressives do know the past and the mistakes that were made, and unlike the conservatives, vow not to make those mistakes again.

It's nice on paper but unfortunately, it doesn't work that way normally We're doing BETTER than they are, sure, and we're doing better than we used to - but we still suck at it.

Part of the problem is moral/ideological superiority. It's absurd and we need to stop it.

 

[drjean]

The difference is Nixon was all talent and no charisma, while Obama is all charisma and no talent.

Nixon's only real political fault was that he got caught. All the politicians use Machiavellian methods to further their own goals.

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

Nixon's only real political fault was that he got caught. All the politicians use Machiavellian methods to further their own goals.

...Machiavellian methods are a pretty big fault (no matter how utterly genius they are), so "getting caught" was most definitely NOT his only fault.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Did you not say that his use of "Forward" in a campaign slogan was an indicator of his communism/Marxism/socialism?

Absolutely, and it's also a signal to his supporters on the far left.

Because there's no evidence of it. None. And any time you are asked for evidence you point to a list of names, most of whom are only Marxist/communist/socialist because Glenn Beck said so (but in reality are nothing of the sort).

Any discussion validates the associations ... which is why you won't attempt to refute them.

The truth is just what it is, CurlyFries. Truth has no agenda. Feel free to point out any mistakes I might make. Do try to substantiate any claims though.

Your ideology is incredibly unstable, Hawk, and I'm concerned for YOU.

Have I ever given you reason to believe I am an ideologue?

The closest I can recall is perhaps claiming to be "libertarian", but even that I've qualified more often than not.

I do believe you're a good person at heart who means well, but this is a path of disaster. You have GOT to put less stock in figures like Beck and put MORE stock in, as you consistently claim to follow, the TRUTH.

Quid pro quo, CurlyFries.

I offer you truth. You offer me truth. It's all good.

If you can't give someone a concrete definition of your enemy's ideology immediately when prompted, it should be a good indication that you need to study that ideology more - and NOT from sources you think you can trust, but from a VARIETY of sources, including the works of Marx himself.

And if you can't give someone a concrete, sourced reason for your enemy following said ideology, it should be a good indication that you've either misjudged your enemy or you've misjudged the ideology you claim he/she follows.

You continue to confuse me with an ideologue, CurlyFries. Why is that?

I merely observe and comment on the obvious.

But no enemy is worth losing the respect people have for you and your ideas.

As you mature, CurlyFries ... assuming you do ... you'll learn that respect is not an externally derived attribute. You perhaps have heard the maxim: "Be true to yourself"?

To that I add God. It's a formula that works for me.

Just the truth, Hawk, from a person who cares about you, regardless of whether we agree

Appreciate the concern.

I will say though that you seem to be drifting toward being an overt idologue, CurlyFries. Just how I see it.

Hint: Ideologies are inherently unstable. Truth is not. That's just the truth.

 

[rturner76]

Nixon was a disgrace to the Unites States

 

[Redac]

I saw it before. Not really much there in the way of a definition.

This isn't difficult, Mach.

I think you may also be confusing a few terms, however. Marxism is a socioeconomic worldview and a method of analyzing history and social change. Communism (as a stage in history) is a classless, stateless society in which the means of production (capital, in other words) are collectively owned and managed by the workers. The Marxist theory of history sees capitalism as one of those historical stages, which will inevitably give way to socialism by way of a proletarian revolution, which will inevitably lead to a purely communist society.

I went ahead and bolded the relevant, non-tenet part of the post. If you can read through the rest of what I've written and still insist that I don't know what Marxism is, then why don't you go ahead and tell me exactly what you'd accept.

 

[Redac]

Absolutely, and it's also a signal to his supporters on the far left.

You're aware that most of those on the far left don't support Obama, right? Like, actual Marxists see him as just another bourgeoisie leader?

 

[NightHawkeye]

You're aware that most of those on the far left don't support Obama, right? Like, actual Marxists see him as just another bourgeoisie leader?

Perhaps his new campaign slogan will fix that little problem.

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

Absolutely, and it's also a signal to his supporters on the far left.

...who are all in pretty much universal agreement that he's not nearly far-left enough

Any discussion validates the associations ... which is why you won't attempt to refute them.

Give me the list again and I'll do my best. You have my word.

Have I ever given you reason to believe I am an ideologue?

Well, yes. I'd classify you as an ideologue for your almost unflinching faith in the correctness of the right

I will say though that you seem to be drifting toward being an overt idologue, CurlyFries. Just how I see it.

Oh, I fully admit to being a hopeless idealist

 

[drjean]

...Machiavellian methods are a pretty big fault (no matter how utterly genius they are), so "getting caught" was most definitely NOT his only fault.

Well I daresay that many people in society use the techniques, albeit poorly, even when they haven't been taught them. Nixon was so good at this method he had to be taken down... and indeed he was.

I pray for Mr Obama's safety as I feel he would be martyred if taken out, and then another socialist would be inserted in his progressive party slot. However, with Mr Romney in the wings, the progressive socialist party has little to fear, imo.

 

[Vylo]

Well I daresay that many people in society use the techniques, albeit poorly, even when they haven't been taught them. Nixon was so good at this method he had to be taken down... and indeed he was.

I pray for Mr Obama's safety as I feel he would be martyred if taken out, and then another socialist would be inserted in his progressive party slot. However, with Mr Romney in the wings, the progressive socialist party has little to fear, imo.

Why exactly do you feel either of them are socialist? Because they believe in progressive taxes? That would make Thomas Jefferson a socialist.

 

[Redac]

Perhaps his new campaign slogan will fix that little problem.

I sincerely doubt it. Saying "Forward" in a campaign slogan doesn't make one a Marxist.

 

[NightHawkeye]

...who are all in pretty much universal agreement that he's not nearly far-left enough

Perhaps his new Marxist/communist/progressive campaign slogan will help mend his shortcomings in that area. They really were expecting a lot when they saw a Marxist getting elected to the oval office.

Give me the list again and I'll do my best. You have my word.

Here's the starter list:

Bill Ayers
Francis Fox Piven
Jeremiah Wright
Van Jones
Valerie Jarret
Cass Sunstein
​

Well, yes. I'd classify you as an ideologue for your almost unflinching faith in the correctness of the right

You know better than that ...

Glenn Beck and Pat Gray celebrate the 2010 election resuts with hilarious results! - YouTube

I talk about the TEA party all the time ...

Oh, I fully admit to being a hopeless idealist

You'll feel better when you get past that. Idealism is not an acceptable substitute for TRUTH. That's just the truth.