Africa... a continent?

[UndertheTELE]

Fox news just reported that during private conversations with Sarah Palin, the McCain campaign staff discovered that Palin did not know which countries are a part of NAFTA, nor did she know that Africa is a continent and not a country...

[Machu505]

I am so glad Obama won haha.

[Mike78098C]

nice!

[anamericangod]

Fox News saying something negative about Sarah Palin? Source plz.

[UndertheTELE]

source please.

I just watched Shepard Smith report it haha

[Machu505]

Fox News saying something negative about Sarah Palin? Source plz.

With the pwning of Nader and now this, maybe FOX has had an intervention.

[anamericangod]

With the pwning of Nader and now this, maybe FOX has had an intervention.

Maybe Rupert Murdoch killed himself.

[Ailite]

Well the right man won then

[Machu505]

Someone at school told me today that McCain should have won because Sarah Palin led her high school basketball team to a championship, and that shows good teamwork.

[Machu505]

Why do the Republicans not even screen their candidates?

Because the party is dying.

[lew_1987]

Didn't Bush say something similar years ago?

[CTMarshall]

It's only because she can't see Africa from her house.

[Machu505]

Bush said a lot of things similar to this.

[lew_1987]

Bush said a lot of things similar to this.

"We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease."

- Sweden, 14/06/01

That's what I was thinking of.

[Indoor Living]

I really hope this is true, because if so, then this country just dogded a huge bullet.

[Machu505]

The thing is not everyone in the Republican party is an idiot. Romney, Giuliani, Ron Paul, Mitch McConnell would have been so much better choices.

The top dogs at the GOP thought they could trick Clinton voters into voting for McCain because Sarah Palin has a vagina. That was they're victory plan and it failed miserably.

[GiggsOho]

Fox news just reported that during private conversations with Sarah Palin, the McCain campaign staff discovered that Palin did not know which countries are a part of NAFTA, nor did she know that Africa is a continent and not a country...


youtube plz

[Machu505]

"We spent a lot of time talking about Africa, as we should. Africa is a nation that suffers from incredible disease."

- Sweden, 14/06/01

That's what I was thinking of.

One could argue that Africa as a whole is loosely one nation, as a nation and a state are technically two different things.

[lew_1987]

That was probably just a slip up. I very much doubt he thought that.

You're probably right, but someone of his stature shouldn't really be making silly mistakes like that.

[FScott]

i cant find anything in google about this

[learn to love]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/5/194551/287

[FScott]

wow i thought it could only be a rumor..

thanks for the link

[tambam]

Even though it's Sarah Palin, I'm still shocked.

[splitsecond]

sounds to me like she may have a little Hilton blood in her.

[FScott]

What was McCain thinking honestly

[Machu505]

What was the GOP thinking honestly

Fixed for accuracy.

[incredulous]

McCain would have had to appeal to America as a whole in order to win; Palin turned out to be too polarizing. I can't think of a Republican who would have been able to do that for McCain without losing the base.

That said, the third graders she mentioned in the debate probably could have told her that Africa is indeed a continent.

[xshady121]

McCain would have had to appeal to America as a whole in order to win; Palin turned out to be too polarizing. I can't think of a Republican who would have been able to do that for McCain without losing the base.

That said, the third graders she mentioned in the debate probably could have told her that Africa is indeed a continent.

He had to appeal to the right wing of the party.

He was in a no win situation. Nominate someone to the right to please the party and alienate the left or nominate another liberal conservative and lose all support in his base.

Hate Bush all you want, but that is one thing he did good back in 2000. He got back over to the right just enough to win the support of his party.

[apoemtothedead]

You're probably right, but someone of his stature shouldn't really be making silly mistakes like that.
People make slip ups all the time. Obama and McCain both made a few during the primaries. I agree that President Bush's was likely a slip-up as well. Even though I think his policies are moronic, he's not an overly dumb guy. He's of average intelligence. Sarah Palin, on the other hand, is fucking retarded.

[xshady121]

I think that was total mistep from the beginning. The right wing of the party would have always stood by him.

Not true at all. They barely stood by Bush and his "compassionate conservatism". Had he not courted the right wing he wouldn't have gotten the money needed for the campaign. As it was, he was heavily out earned by Obama..

The smart choice would have been Bloomberg.. Had he not been so concerned with courting the hilary voters, perhaps he might have considered bloomberg.

[KidLightning]

I think that was total mistep from the beginning. The right wing of the party would have always stood by him.
Yeah, that's what I don't understand. The conservative right wing would have voted for McCain simply because he had the Republican label attached to him, and had he remained the McCain he used to be he could've gathered a number of democrats as well and won. He definitely fucked this one up, and it all began when he fired his original advisors and hired on those who got Bush elected.

[Jason Tate]

I think that was total mistep from the beginning. The right wing of the party would have always stood by him.
Agreed

[Jason Tate]

Not true at all. They barely stood by Bush and his "compassionate conservatism". Had he not courted the right wing he wouldn't have gotten the money needed for the campaign. As it was, he was heavily out earned by Obama..

The smart choice would have been Bloomberg.. Had he not been so concerned with courting the hilary voters, perhaps he might have considered bloomberg.
He accepted public funding.

[saysmydoctor]

What a joke.

[*crying stars*]

I want all my conservative friends who love Palin to hear this.

Holy crap.

[KidLightning]

Obama pulled a miracle out of the bag in winning this election. McCain should have won it but he picked a terrible running mate, dealt with the economic issue horribbly and completely neglected the fact that America has changed in the last eight years. He basically ran Bush's campaign and did not realise people knew the tricks and they were ready for them and didn't care.
Well come the end it wasn't a miracle, but were McCain the same man/candidate as he was in 2000, yes, it would have been a miracle. But I agree with everything else you said.

[xshady121]

Well come the end it wasn't a miracle, but were McCain the same man/candidate as he was in 2000, yes, it would have been a miracle. But I agree with everything else you said.

The economic crisis was the best thing for Obama. The polls were pretty close, and McCain was gaining at the time.

Afterwards, Americans felt better with Obama tackling the economy than McCain. If McCain had someone halfway descent, last night wouldn't have been as one sided.

[apoemtothedead]

The economic crisis was the best thing for Obama. The polls were pretty close, and McCain was gaining at the time.

Afterwards, Americans felt better with Obama tackling the economy than McCain. If McCain had someone halfway descent, last night wouldn't have been as one sided.
McCain was only gaining at that time because of the post-convention bump. In all likelihood Obama would have won this election, albeit by a slimmer margin, even without the collapse of the economy.

[KidLightning]

The economic crisis was the best thing for Obama. The polls were pretty close, and McCain was gaining at the time.

Afterwards, Americans felt better with Obama tackling the economy than McCain. If McCain had someone halfway descent, last night wouldn't have been as one sided.
While McCain's awful reaction to the economic crisis did help bolster Obama (along with his own reaction), the McCain campaign would have fallen apart on its own anyway after picking Palin. Yes his numbers went up afterwards, but that was just with the excitement of him picking a woman and an "outsider". His numbers would have fallen far enough (although maybe not quite as far) without the collapse of the banks just by having her as his running mate. You can't hide idiocy forever.

[xshady121]

While McCain's awful reaction to the economic crisis did help bolster Obama (along with his own reaction), the McCain campaign would have fallen apart on its own anyway after picking Palin. Yes his numbers went up afterwards, but that was just with the excitement of him picking a woman and an "outsider". His numbers would have fallen far enough (although maybe not quite as far) without the collapse of the banks just by having her as his running mate. You can't hide idiocy forever.

Dan Quale was hidden for 4 years.

[xshady121]

McCain was only gaining at that time because of the post-convention bump. In all likelihood Obama would have won this election, albeit by a slimmer margin, even without the collapse of the economy.

Not entirely true. The bailout thing started Sept 18. The RNC was Sept 1.

Sept 24 He was still tied. A bump doesn't last 3 weeks.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110668/Gallup-Daily-Race-Back-Tie-46-Each.aspx

[apoemtothedead]

Not entirely true. The bailout thing started Sept 18. The RNC was Sept 1.

Sept 24 He was still tied. A bump doesn't last 3 weeks.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110668/Gallup-Daily-Race-Back-Tie-46-Each.aspx
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Takes the lead on the 7th, peaks on the 9th and fades back to a tie by the 17th. An average of all the polls is a much better measure.

[xshady121]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Takes the lead on the 7th, peaks on the 9th and fades back to a tie by the 17th. An average of all the polls is a much better measure.

Hm, interesting. Still, the election would have been entirely different sans the whole bailout fiasco.

[saysmydoctor]

The economy was struggling before the bailout and the crash.

[captainhampton]

the scary thing is that the GOP still might push her for a run in 2012. please no. give me Bobby Jindal.

[apoemtothedead]

the scary thing is that the GOP still might push her for a run in 2012. please no. give me Bobby Jindal.
i'd love that pick too.


No way a minority wins the Presidency on the Republican ticket. No time soon, at least.

[xshady121]

the scary thing is that the GOP still might push her for a run in 2012. please no. give me Bobby Jindal.

No they wont. They made the mistake of electing Dole in 96 after Clinton's unpopular first term. They were coming off a big win in the midterm elections, and took a step back with their candidate. They will undoubtedly have a win in 2010 (A presidents party has only gained seats twice during his first midterm election, 1932 and 2002, which was only due to 9/11). They will need to utilize the momentum of the 2010 gains into a viable, likable candidate in 2012. Perhaps open up the GOP to Ron Paul? Only time will tell.

[saysmydoctor]

Jindal? Yeah, no.

[apoemtothedead]

No they wont. They made the mistake of electing Dole in 96 after Clinton's unpopular first term. They were coming off a big win in the midterm elections, and took a step back with their candidate. They will undoubtedly have a win in 2010 (A presidents party has only gained seats twice during his first midterm election, 1932 and 2002, which was only due to 9/11). They will need to utilize the momentum of the 2010 gains into a viable, likable candidate in 2012. Perhaps open up the GOP to Ron Paul? Only time will tell.
I'll take Ron Paul too.

[xshady121]

I'll take Ron Paul too.

I don't know a republican that wouldn't. They should seriously consider it. Especially when you consider most Ron Paul voters went Obama.

[apoemtothedead]

I don't know a republican that wouldn't. They should seriously consider it. Especially when you consider most Ron Paul voters went Obama.
I think he's far too radical and might scare his base.

[xshady121]

I think he's far too radical and might scare his base.

We've seen crazier things. Like Obama get elected president.

[apoemtothedead]

We've seen crazier things. Like Obama get elected president.
Except Obama isn't far too radical and only scared off the bitter Hillary supporters. :rolleyes:

[Jason Tate]

I don't know a republican that wouldn't. They should seriously consider it. Especially when you consider most Ron Paul voters went Obama.
You mean you know plenty of republicans that wouldn't ... seeing as he got his ass kicked in the primaries.

[open mind]

....and this campaign still had the balls to use "country first" as it's slogan.

[samsara]

what a dumb bitch....

[xshady121]

You mean you know plenty of republicans that wouldn't ... seeing as he got his ass kicked in the primaries.

Considering I am a college student and most of Paul's support was of college students, than yes, Yes I do know many republicans who would support him. Also, you can argue he got poor coverage from the news media, especially Fox News, the news base for most republicans who actually will vote in a primary. If Republicans would take a look at his stances, they would support him. But since he isn't a typical gop member, he's shunned. Hopefully Palin being a VP nominee will open the media door to more "outsiders" in the Republican party.

[lew_1987]

People make slip ups all the time. Obama and McCain both made a few during the primaries. I agree that President Bush's was likely a slip-up as well. Even though I think his policies are moronic, he's not an overly dumb guy. He's of average intelligence. Sarah Palin, on the other hand, is fucking retarded.

Yeah, everyone makes mistakes. It might be that Bush's are so well known because people love him screwing up, and people tend to overlook other candidates's slip-ups.

[aoftbsten]

Someone at school told me today that McCain should have won because Sarah Palin led her high school basketball team to a championship, and that shows good teamwork.

oh, right... i can see how that's logical

[aoftbsten]

Considering I am a college student and most of Paul's support was of college students, than yes, Yes I do know many republicans who would support him. Also, you can argue he got poor coverage from the news media, especially Fox News, the news base for most republicans who actually will vote in a primary. If Republicans would take a look at his stances, they would support him. But since he isn't a typical gop member, he's shunned. Hopefully Palin being a VP nominee will open the media door to more "outsiders" in the Republican party.

i agree, Ron Paul was a much better candidate for the republicans, i think they would have had a better shot at winning if they hadn't shunned him.

[rcrook]

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/13/msnbc-retracts-false-palin-story-duped/

it was a hoax

[lew_1987]

Lol.

[tait]

wow, glad obama won

[Adeniz19]

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/13/msnbc-retracts-false-palin-story-duped/

it was a hoax
The hoax was limited to the identity of the source in the story about Palin -- not the FOX News story itself. While Palin has denied that she mistook Africa for a country, the veracity of that report was not put in question by the revelation that Eisenstadt is a phony.

[boykosaurus]

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/13/msnbc-retracts-false-palin-story-duped/

it was a hoax

heh, awesome source ya got there. And it actually doesn't prove the Palin aspect of it it false.

[alice+interiors]

Skimmed this thread, most of what I'm getting from this is that Fox news has decided it's alliances should rest firmer with the Republican Party than Sarah Palin, and has started a few rumours about her to distance her from the campaign.

[alltimehoe93]

when i first heard this bit about palin, i refused to believe it because my first thought was 'psh no way, no one could be THAT stupid...right?'
wrong apparently
that really didn't help palin's lack of popularity...

[berskyjr]

why would someone make this shit up, right now????? the election is over, forget about sarah palin you stupid fucks.

[Bitter_Clinger]

Fox news just reported that during private conversations with Sarah Palin, the McCain campaign staff discovered that Palin did not know which countries are a part of NAFTA, nor did she know that Africa is a continent and not a country...

Lies... It has since been proven false and most new sources whpo ran the story have issued retractions... The reports the the media were made by an Obama campaign operative..

[Bitter_Clinger]

when i first heard this bit about palin, i refused to believe it because my first thought was 'psh no way, no one could be THAT stupid...right?'
wrong apparently
that really didn't help palin's lack of popularity...

Lack of popularity?
Are you freakin retarded???
She was as popular as NoBama himself...
The media failed to report on the size of the crowds that she drew to hear her speak...
Not to mention she more executive experience than NoBama and Janito McCain put together...
You wouldn't turn NoBama lose to run Exxon-Mobil would you? See, Exxon is one of the worlds largest coporations. NoBama doesn't have the first clue on how to actually run a business, i.e. NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE.
The U.S. economy is larger than the worlds top 15 corporations combined. So how in the Hell is he going to run the country on NO EXECUTIVE Experience...

Not to mention his lack of knowlege of government and the political process.
Did you hear his numerous gaffes during the campaign.
The guy doesn't know the difference between a tax on income and a tax on capital gains.

The real issue is that MOST Americans don't know crap about how our government works nor the political process.

The real fact is that America is inherently conservative. That was proven by the fact that 4 states that had a ballot measure to ban gay marriage, passed the measures to ban gay marriage.

The reason NoBama was elected was based purely on Race, Media bias and general Public Ignorance.

Wake Up People...

[Machu505]

Hahahaha^

[Praetor]

Lack of popularity?
Are you freakin retarded???
She was as popular as NoBama himself...
The media failed to report on the size of the crowds that she drew to hear hear speak...
Not to mention she more executive experience than NoBama and Janito McCain put together...
You wouldn't turn NoBama lose to run Exxon-Mobil would you? See, Exxon is one of the worlds largest coporations. NoBama doesn't have the first clue on how to actually run a business, i.e. NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE.
The U.S. economy is larger than the worlds top 15 corporations combined. So how in the Hell is he going to run the country on NO EXECUTIVE Experience...

Not to mention his lack of knowlege of government and the political process.
Did you hear his numerous gaffes during the campaign.
The guy doesn't know the difference between a tax on income and a tax on capital gains.

The real issue is that MOST Americans don't know crap about how our government works nor the political process.

The real fact is that America is inherently conservative. That was proven by the fact that 4 states that had a ballot measure to ban gay marriage, passed the measures to ban gay marriage.

The reason NoBama was elected was based purely on Race, Media bias and general Public Ignorance.

Wake Up People...I don't even know where to start...I would put you on ignore but I expect more lol's from you in the future so I'll keep you.

[Bitter_Clinger]

why would someone make this shit up, right now????? the election is over, forget about sarah palin you stupid fucks.

That's an easy question to answer..
The Republican party has been infiltrated by Liberals..
As you might have noticed George w. bush has governed as a moderate..
McCain is a moderate...

The fact is that America is inherently conservative.
Palin represents middle america.. People like her.. She's sharp, she direct, and she represents what most of america stands for..(Don't believe me? 4 states 3 of which are in the top most Liberal, voted to ban gay marriage.. Which wasa very conservative bill)
And Sarah Pazlin is a true conservative..
So, those who control the drive by media machine and those in government who seek to communize the United states are SCARED TO DEATH OF HER....
They fear that she would win in 2012...

But don't worry...
Inexperienced NoBama and his socialist cronies in the house and senate are going to do a fine job at wrecking things..

[Machu505]

This person is bitter and he clings to his guns and religion.

[samsara]

butt clinger

[Bitter_Clinger]

I don't even know where to start...I would put you on ignore but I expect more lol's from you in the future so I'll keep you.

Of course you don't know where to start.. you're an ignorant child with no real life experience and zero understanding of government..

I would challenge you to a debate on any political subject on any day of the week and bury you in the quagmire of ignorance..

[Praetor]

Of course you don't.. you an ignorant little twit with no real life experience and zero understanding of government..

I would challeneg you to a debate on any political subject on any day of the week and bury in the quagmire of ignorance..
I can structure a sentence properly. Me > you, any day.

[samsara]

Haha he actually used quagmire in a sentence

[Machu505]

That's an easy question to answer..
The Republican party has been infiltrated by Liberals..

Haha, ok.

As you might have noticed George w. bush has governed as a moderate..
McCain is a moderate...

The hell?

The fact is that America is inherently conservative.
Palin represents middle america.. People like her.. She's sharp, she direct, and she represents what most of america stands for..(Don't believe me? 4 states 3 of which are in the top most Liberal, voted to ban gay marriage.. Which wasa very conservative bill)
And Sarah Pazlin is a true conservative..
So, those who control the drive by media machine and those in government who seek to communize the United states are SCARED TO DEATH OF HER....
They fear that she would win in 2012...

Epic lolz.

But don't worry...
Inexperienced NoBama and his socialist cronies in the house and senate are going to do a fine job at wrecking things..

How is Obama socialist. Please, tell me.

[berskyjr]

That's an easy question to answer..
The Republican party has been infiltrated by Liberals..
As you might have noticed George w. bush has governed as a moderate..
McCain is a moderate...

The fact is that America is inherently conservative.
Palin represents middle america.. People like her.. She's sharp, she direct, and she represents what most of america stands for..(Don't believe me? 4 states 3 of which are in the top most Liberal, voted to ban gay marriage.. Which wasa very conservative bill)
And Sarah Pazlin is a true conservative..
So, those who control the drive by media machine and those in government who seek to communize the United states are SCARED TO DEATH OF HER....
They fear that she would win in 2012...

But don't worry...
Inexperienced NoBama and his socialist cronies in the house and senate are going to do a fine job at wrecking things..
good explanation.

[Bitter_Clinger]

Haha, ok.

How is Obama socialist. Please, tell me.

The Redistribution of wealth (which is a practice that Obama has vowed to adobt in his presidency) is a Marxist economic practice.
As Obama vowed to Joe the Plumber that he intends to do.

Any time you raise taxes (take from those who earn more) and increase government social programs (give to those who earn less)that is socialist.
Socialism by nature punishes those who out perform others in business.

If you look into Obama's past, you will find that he was a memeber of the NEW PARTY which is a party aimed at bringing Democrats further to the Left throughMarxist social and economic programs..

[Bitter_Clinger]

good explanation.

Wow... Someone who get's it...

I appreciate a fair amount of brain...

[samsara]

hahah

Dear sarcasm,

I love you

[alltimehoe93]

Lack of popularity?
Are you freakin retarded???
She was as popular as NoBama himself...
The media failed to report on the size of the crowds that she drew to hear her speak...
Not to mention she more executive experience than NoBama and Janito McCain put together...
You wouldn't turn NoBama lose to run Exxon-Mobil would you? See, Exxon is one of the worlds largest coporations. NoBama doesn't have the first clue on how to actually run a business, i.e. NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE.
The U.S. economy is larger than the worlds top 15 corporations combined. So how in the Hell is he going to run the country on NO EXECUTIVE Experience...

Not to mention his lack of knowlege of government and the political process.
Did you hear his numerous gaffes during the campaign.
The guy doesn't know the difference between a tax on income and a tax on capital gains.

The real issue is that MOST Americans don't know crap about how our government works nor the political process.

The real fact is that America is inherently conservative. That was proven by the fact that 4 states that had a ballot measure to ban gay marriage, passed the measures to ban gay marriage.

The reason NoBama was elected was based purely on Race, Media bias and general Public Ignorance.

Wake Up People...
Alright dude you really need to calm the fuck down.
Haha he actually used quagmire in a sentence
I laughed at that too lol

[Machu505]

The Redistribution of wealth (which is a practice that Obama has vowed to adobt in his presidency) is a Marxist economic practice.
As Obama vowed to Joe the Plumber that he intends to do.

Any time you raise taxes (take from those who earn more) and increase government social programs (give to those who earn less)that is socialist.
Socialism by nature punishes those who out perform others in business.

If you look into Obama's past, you will find that he was a memeber of the NEW PARTY which is a party aimed at bringing Democrats further to the Left throughMarxist social and economic programs..

Socialism the the common and collective ownership of means of production and distribution. By your definition, every sort of tax of really any kind is "marxism". Good ol' Sam Wurzelbacher (call him by his fucking name) probably wouldn't have much of a problem with "marxism", seeing as he has been on welfare twice. But that's different, right? I bet.

Let's talk about Alaska. Every year, the state of Alaska hands out checks to all it's citizens, all under Sarah Palin's watch. Seems like she's a fan of "marxism" too. Now let's talk about J-Mac and G-Dub. Is taking from the poor and giving to the rich count as socialism too? Because if so, they're marxists too. Not only because of that, but because G-Dub sure loves nationalizing banks, and that's real socialism.

[Praetor]

The Redistribution of wealth (which is a practice that Obama has vowed to adobt in his presidency) is a Marxist economic practice.
As Obama vowed to Joe the Plumber that he intends to do.

Any time you raise taxes (take from those who earn more) and increase government social programs (give to those who earn less)that is socialist.
Socialism by nature punishes those who out perform others in business.

If you look into Obama's past, you will find that he was a memeber of the NEW PARTY which is a party aimed at bringing Democrats further to the Left throughMarxist social and economic programs..
You do realize your ol' boy McCain voted for the bailout, right?

[Machu505]

If this was all really sarcasm, I'm gonna be pissed.

[Praetor]

If this was all really sarcasm, I'm gonna be pissed.
Would be a huge letdown.

[samsara]

would be funny though

[saysmydoctor]

The Redistribution of wealth (which is a practice that Obama has vowed to adobt in his presidency) is a Marxist economic practice.
As Obama vowed to Joe the Plumber that he intends to do.

Any time you raise taxes (take from those who earn more) and increase government social programs (give to those who earn less)that is socialist.
Socialism by nature punishes those who out perform others in business.

If you look into Obama's past, you will find that he was a memeber of the NEW PARTY which is a party aimed at bringing Democrats further to the Left throughMarxist social and economic programs..
This is not socialism's purpose.

[Bitter_Clinger]

You do realize your ol' boy McCain voted for the bailout, right?

Why do you ASSume I supported McCain?

Nowhere in this thread have I said anything remotely in defense of (and I quote myself) "Juanito McCain"..

Because I support Sarah Palin on a number of her Conservative views doesn't suggest that I voted for McCain...

See there... Your youthful naivety has shown through already...

[Bitter_Clinger]

This is not socialism's purpose.

It doesn't have to be socialism's purpose..
The fact that socialism punishes productivity is a by-product.
It forces those who are capable of producing a better lifestyle for themselves, into a lesser one.
Plus, socialism by its very nature causes governement dependancy.

This is a very simple analogy of how socialism works.

My kids (and I have four of them), got an early start on halloween.
They started trick or treating right at sun down.

We mapped out the neighborhood and I recommended the most efficiant route which I felt would yield the greatest reward.

Then we started out the door.

By the end of the evening my kids were some of the last kids out knocking doors.

Earliest out, latest back in.

Now, friends of theirs who prhaps started later, didn't plan as well, or were just not as motivated and were fine with only knocking a few doors, came home with less candy.

Socialism says that as parents my wife and I should have taken a portion of candy from my kids and given it to some of the kids who ended the night with less candy.

But, such is not the case.

However, because of my kids' overall productivity, they were able to choose to donate some of their candy to a cause of their choice.

We boxed up a portion of their candy and sent it to some soldiers in Iraq..

But it was their choice to do so. There was no punishement involved if they had chosen not to, (i.e. Tax Evasion being punishable by law... which means the law says you MUST forfeit a portion of your earnings so that others may benefit form it..)

Any questions?

[Bitter_Clinger]

This is not socialism's purpose.

It doesn't have to be socialism's purpose..
The fact that socialism punishes productivity is a by-product.
It forces those who are capable of producing a better lifestyle for themselves, into a lesser one.
Plus, socialism by its very nature causes governement dependancy.

This is a very simple analogy of how socialism works.

My kids (and I have four of them), got an early start on halloween.
They started trick or treating right at sun down.

We mapped out the neighborhood and I recommended the most efficiant route which I felt would yield the greatest reward.

Then we started out the door.

By the end of the evening my kids were some of the last kids out knocking doors.

Earliest out, latest back in.

Now, friends of theirs who prhaps started later, didn't plan as well, or were just not as motivated and were fine with only knocking a few doors, came home with less candy.

Socialism says that as parents my wife and I should have taken a portion of candy from my kids and given it to some of the kids who ended the night with less candy.

But, such is not the case.

However, because of my kids' overall productivity, they were able to choose to donate some of their candy to a cause of their choice.

We boxed up a portion of their candy and sent it to some soldiers in Iraq..

But it was their choice to do so. There was no punishement involved if they had chosen not to, (i.e. Tax Evasion being punishable by law... which means the law says you MUST forfeit a portion of your earnings so that others may benefit form it..)

Any questions?

[samsara]

double post

[shit stroll]

apparently someone has never heard of keynesian economics.

[Bitter_Clinger]

Socialism the the common and collective ownership of means of production and distribution. By your definition, every sort of tax of really any kind is "marxism". Good ol' Sam Wurzelbacher (call him by his fucking name) probably wouldn't have much of a problem with "marxism", seeing as he has been on welfare twice. But that's different, right? I bet.

Let's talk about Alaska. Every year, the state of Alaska hands out checks to all it's citizens, all under Sarah Palin's watch. Seems like she's a fan of "marxism" too. Now let's talk about J-Mac and G-Dub. Is taking from the poor and giving to the rich count as socialism too? Because if so, they're marxists too. Not only because of that, but because G-Dub sure loves nationalizing banks, and that's real socialism.

A: Who cares what Sam "Joe The Plumber" Wurzelbacher has or hasn't done.
He doesn't represent me or my interests.
Neither does Janito McCain..

B: Alaska distributes a yearly "Oil Dividend" check which means that as opposed to having a state income tax a portion of residents income goes into oil investments.
Dividends are a little different than hand outs.
I mean.. Hey.. I could be wrong...

[Machu505]

A: Who cares what Sam "Joe The Plumber" Wurzelbacher has or hasn't done.
He doesn't represent me or my interests.
Neither does Janito McCain..

Then why did you mention him?

B: Alaska distributes a yearly "Oil Dividend" check which means that as opposed to having a state income tax a portion of residents income goes into oil investments.
Dividends are a little different than hand outs.
I mean.. Hey.. I could be wrong...

Sounds like "spreadin' the wealth around" to me.

By the way, why do you call him "Juanito McCain"?

[Bitter_Clinger]

apparently someone has never heard of keynesian economics.

Keynesian economic theory is correct in the context of Lowering interest rates which stimulates borrowing on things like Small business, homes, and vehicles etc.

But history has proven time and time again that aside from interest rates, the way to stimulate an economy is to Decrease taxes on income and capital gains.

Speaking for myself, there were times early on in my marriage when asking for a raise almost didn't make sense because it would have placed me in ahigher tax bracket and resulted in less take home pay. Less take home pay means a lowering of my ability to put kmoney into the economy through investing and luxury purchases. Which boils down to a life style of necessities.

In most cases, a raise for you means a rais for Governemt and a cut in pay for you.

Fact: 32% of all Americans have ZERO Tax Liability.
The majority of those who have no tax liability actually get more back than they initially pay in.

that is called a government re-distribution of wealth or by it's technical term, SOCIALISM...

[Bitter_Clinger]

Let me just preface this my saying I am not a socialist, I am a libertarian, before you attempt to bring anything like that up. That said you are totally misguided on many aspects of socialism.


There are no political parties anywhere in the United States proposing we do not in any form redistribute wealth to some extent.

Actually there are. The constitutionlist party and the Libertarian party..

both parties support a Flat income tax that is intended to fund the necessary functions of government which are National Defense and the preservation of freedom and Liberty under the constitution.

The purpose of government is simply to do for the country what the country cannot do for itself.

Unfortunnately, under Woodrow Wilson (A Liberal Progressive) and Franklin D roosevelt (A Liberal Progressive) there was an elimination of the gold standard and the institution of a Federal income tax...

Not to mention all of the other socila programs that were strted by Roosevelt..

It's a fact that the depression went 7 years longer than it should have as a result of the "New Deal" policies.

[Bitter_Clinger]

[quote=lunchforthesky;27692162]Let me just preface this my saying I am not a socialist, I am a libertarian, before you attempt to bring anything like that up. That said you are totally misguided on many aspects of socialism.


The idea that those who are rich give a portion of their wealth to the poor is not a communist idea, it is not a socialist idea, it is not an anarchist, fascist or even capitalist idea it is an idea which EVERYONE agrees on where you are right wing, left wing or down the centre.

It most certainly is a socialist idea. And it most certainly is NOT an idea thet EVERYONE agrees with.

Our founding fathers for one were strictly against a federal income tax. In fact the constitution forbids it.

Go studyy the history of the 16th ammendment.
It was NEVER properly ratified.
and that is a fact.

[Bitter_Clinger]

France, The UK, and Canada are ALL socialist countries. Sure they have their elements od democracy but all three are inherently socialist.

Also, in Lenninist countries, you may work for everything you have, but at the end of the day, you have far less than you work for.
That being said, it is also a fact that Germany, Russia (and other Marxist countries) would euthanise those who wer ethough to be a drain on the system, i.e the handicapped or mentally retarded etc.

The difference today is that if you can't afford to take care of yourself, the goverbnment takes care of you. If you are just plain lazy, the government will take care of you.

The difference being that an individuals first resort for support should not be the government. It should be the family. And the government should incentivise families by providing a tax cut.

Instead the government incentivises institutions and nursing homes and uses the tax payer's dollars to fund those programs.

[Bitter_Clinger]

Firstly the founding fathers barely even lived in the age of the nation state nevermind in an industrialised modern economic climate. What they think on this is of zero relevance.

Secondly income tax is not the only method by which to resdistribute wealth at all.

First, your comment on the founding fathers not being relevant was probably the single most ignorant thing I've read in some time.

Second, anyone with half a brain knows that there are many methods through which to re-distribute wealth.

Income tax simply happens to be the method that the Fed has chosen to do so.

The single best way to re-distribute wealth is through voluntary, charitable contributions.
Which, might i add is something that Liberals are not very familiar with.

Barack and Michelle Obama are on the record as having donated less than 5% of their overall income to charity over the past 5 years.
Joe Diden gives less than $400 per year to charity.
Now that's generousity for ya..
I suppose big government is the greater cause.

I gave more than that to my wife's parents and each each of her siblings for Christmas last year.
and I make less than either of them per year.
Gladly, I provide a good lifestyle to my family, but trust me, i know what it means to re-distribute through TAXES and charity.

[Bitter_Clinger]

So you're not going to address the fact that you know nothing about socialism?



The Libertarian Party and the Constitutionalist Party oppose sales taxes, income taxes, vehicle taxes, fuel taxes, business taxes, social security and every other form of wealth distribution?

both parties support a Flat income tax that is intended to fund the necessary functions of government which are National Defense and the preservation of freedom and Liberty under the constitution.

The purpose of government is simply to do for the country what the country cannot do for itself.



The gold standard is a horrible idea. You do realise there is more wealth in New York City alone than the value of gold in the entire world combined? Other nations would slaughter you were you on the gold standard. It keeps the value of your currency ridiculously high and no other countries would ever invest in America, sell you anything (including oil) and the world would not use the dollar as currency. Trade with America would cease you exist as all your products would cost too much.

It is a completely absurd idea in a global economy in principle never mind the fact that there's nowhere near enough gold anyway.

Why are you parroting what I already said?

Go back and review.

As I clearly said, reffering to the Libertarian and constitutionalist parties, they support a flat tax..
And as I said the purpose of government is to do for the nation what the nation cannot do for itself...

And yes the UK is socialist.
Not as much so as France obviously but far more so than Canada.
Thanks to good old "Owen"...

And I never said abandon the old or helpless.
I suggested that the family be their first resort for additional support.

[Bitter_Clinger]

I support a fair tax or flat tax...
But it should be a flat sales tax not an income tax..

I feel that it's wrong to tax productivity.

[open mind]

I support a fair tax or flat tax...
But it should be a flat sales tax not an income tax..

I feel that it's wrong to tax productivity.

a flat tax leaves lower income and middle class households paying taxes at a higher rate......and i'd argue those are the people auctually producing things.

[Bitter_Clinger]

a flat tax leaves lower income and middle class households paying taxes at a higher rate......and i'd argue those are the people auctually producing things.

Ummm.. you're wrong...
10% sales tax is 10% accross the board..
It doesn't favor anyone..
If anything. those who earn more can afford to spend more therefore they would pay more into the system under a flat sales tax...

[open mind]

Ummm.. you're wrong...
10% sales tax is 10% accross the board..
It doesn't favor anyone..
If anything. those who earn more can afford to spend more therefore they would pay more into the system under a flat sales tax...

proportionally they'd be paying more.....paying 10% on 10,000 dollars is more painful then paying 10% on a million.
it sets up a system in which the rich pay less taxes, and the middle/lower class pay more.....unless you include all sorts of deductions and what not....but that kind of defeats the purpose of a flat tax.

[saysmydoctor]

It doesn't have to be socialism's purpose..
The fact that socialism punishes productivity is a by-product.
It forces those who are capable of producing a better lifestyle for themselves, into a lesser one.
Plus, socialism by its very nature causes governement dependancy.

This is a very simple analogy of how socialism works.

My kids (and I have four of them), got an early start on halloween.
They started trick or treating right at sun down.

We mapped out the neighborhood and I recommended the most efficiant route which I felt would yield the greatest reward.

Then we started out the door.

By the end of the evening my kids were some of the last kids out knocking doors.

Earliest out, latest back in.

Now, friends of theirs who prhaps started later, didn't plan as well, or were just not as motivated and were fine with only knocking a few doors, came home with less candy.

Socialism says that as parents my wife and I should have taken a portion of candy from my kids and given it to some of the kids who ended the night with less candy.

But, such is not the case.

However, because of my kids' overall productivity, they were able to choose to donate some of their candy to a cause of their choice.

We boxed up a portion of their candy and sent it to some soldiers in Iraq..

But it was their choice to do so. There was no punishement involved if they had chosen not to, (i.e. Tax Evasion being punishable by law... which means the law says you MUST forfeit a portion of your earnings so that others may benefit form it..)

Any questions?
I found your anecdote hard to follow so I stopped reading.

Also, the bolded is false.

[saysmydoctor]

Ummm.. you're wrong...
10% sales tax is 10% accross the board..
It doesn't favor anyone..
If anything. those who earn more can afford to spend more therefore they would pay more into the system under a flat sales tax...
Common misconception. It actually does hurt the less wealthy more (the wealthy can afford taxes).

[saysmydoctor]

It shocks me little that this guy is from Saratoga Springs.

[saysmydoctor]

Keynesian economic theory is correct in the context of Lowering interest rates which stimulates borrowing on things like Small business, homes, and vehicles etc.

But history has proven time and time again that aside from interest rates, the way to stimulate an economy is to Decrease taxes on income and capital gains.

Speaking for myself, there were times early on in my marriage when asking for a raise almost didn't make sense because it would have placed me in ahigher tax bracket and resulted in less take home pay. Less take home pay means a lowering of my ability to put kmoney into the economy through investing and luxury purchases. Which boils down to a life style of necessities.

In most cases, a raise for you means a rais for Governemt and a cut in pay for you.

Fact: 32% of all Americans have ZERO Tax Liability.
The majority of those who have no tax liability actually get more back than they initially pay in.

that is called a government re-distribution of wealth or by it's technical term, SOCIALISM...
Hey, retard, socialism is not simply a redistribution of wealth (which is taxation in any shape or manner), it's more complicated. Socialism is the concept of an egalitarian society, classles by definition that acts as a transitional phase to communism.

[saysmydoctor]

Why are you parroting what I already said?

Go back and review.

As I clearly said, reffering to the Libertarian and constitutionalist parties, they support a flat tax..
And as I said the purpose of government is to do for the nation what the nation cannot do for itself...

And yes the UK is socialist.
Not as much so as France obviously but far more so than Canada.
Thanks to good old "Owen"...

And I never said abandon the old or helpless.
I suggested that the family be their first resort for additional support.
All three of those nations are welfare capitalist states, not socialist nations. Swing and a miss.

[Jason Tate]

Probably best to ignore. He's clearly a complete moron.
I wish I had your fortitude.

[_jonas]

But such a perfect username.

[Machu505]

Haha, that guy actually pulled the "FDR prolonged the depression" card.

[_jonas]

umm...blah
point...(yeah, win fuckface)

blah umm... blah
"nother point...(bow to me assholes)

blah blah blah umm...
in conclusion...(yeah, I just schooled your asses!)