[Cardfan1]

But then again, the democratic party at that time had not proudly and officially taken on the principals of Lenin & Marx, coupled with the showmanship of Stan & Ollie to promote it.

It's becoming obvious that the words commie, communist, Red, Lenin and Marx are being thrown around and no one really knows how they relate.

[Cardfan1]

Does anyone else feel like we have intruded on Cardfan's family reunion along with "thecavemeister" , and "the urban umbrella".

Why the genetics of these cousins appear to be so strong that one could swear they are all the same fly by night bird.

I infer these are former posters who didn't share the same views as you guys.

[Bob Seger]

It's becoming obvious that the words commie, communist, Red, Lenin and Marx are being thrown around and no one really knows how they relate.

Oh, I think everybody on here knows exactly how all of the words relate, especially when your owns thoughts get applied into the conversation. You forgot to include "red"birdfan1 to your collection. Apparently "birds" of a feather, all flock together.

[Bob Seger]

I infer these are former posters who didn't share the same views as you guys.

Hmmm, well now, you just confirmed your question to everybody, comrade theurbancavebird1.

[Cardfan1]

Oh, I think everybody on here knows exactly how all of the words relate, especially when your owns thoughts get applied into the conversation. You forgot to include "red"birdfan1 to your collection. Apparently "birds" of a feather, all flock together.

No one has been able to explain what makes Bernie a communist, which is pretty laughable: been able to call names and associate me with other posters on here, but can't explain the communist platform Bernie Sanders is running on.

[Bob Seger]

No one has been able to explain what makes Bernie a communist, which is pretty laughable: been able to call names and associate me with other posters on here, but can't explain the communist platform Bernie Sanders is running on.

But then again you have never been able to see what is the obvious. Red is red. But lets be honest, you have always thought you were just so intellectually slick that you could convince someone that red is green. You always failed, but nonetheless.

We can just refer to you from now on as the red trinity.

[TheRealThing]

My bad. When you tied your come to the Republican light moment I assumed you were comparing it to the president's.

If you were half as slippery as you imagine, you might sell some of this blather. I did compare Reagan, myself and Trump's change of mind when we said goodbye to the party of lies. Millions have done the same thing, and frankly, millions are in process of doing so as we speak. Trump's support among the black community has risen to at least 30% for example. Ask Van Jones. In deluding themselves about how much people hate being lied to, the left shows beyond doubt that they are about to make the exact same mistake that cost them in 2016.

You focused exclusively on the President's spiritual condition when you came at the him in judgment of his eternal sted with the Lord. At that point you attacked his character yet again as if you were worthy. An admittedly more lofty plane that I inhabit. And let's at least be honest enough to admit that the recognition of ol Bern's socialist palate is by no stretch limited to this forum. Thousands of sources have it just that way. You on the other hand have done exactly nothing to disprove he's a socialist, but given your past nobody expects that. Bernie Sanders says he's a Democratic socialist. You need to get in touch with him and explain how hard stuff like that makes it for you to mount a meaningful defense.

[Cardfan1]

But then again you have never been able to see what is the obvious. Red is red. But lets be honest, you have always thought you were just so intellectually slick that you could convince someone that red is green. You always failed, but nonetheless.

We can just refer to you from now on as the red trinity.

"Red is red" doesn't answer the question of what are Bernie's communist platforms.


Are you trying to say I am another member of this site?
I've been on here since 2012, but never posted in the Political forum until recently. I've always been Cardfan1 and never anyone else.

[Cardfan1]

If you were half as slippery as you imagine, you might sell some of this blather. I did compare Reagan, myself and Trump's change of mind when we said goodbye to the party of lies. Millions have done the same thing, and frankly, millions are in process of doing so as we speak. Trump's support among the black community has risen to at least 30% for example. Ask Van Jones. In deluding themselves about how much people hate being lied to, the left shows beyond doubt that they are about to make the exact same mistake that cost them in 2016.

You focused exclusively on the President's spiritual condition when you came at the him in judgment of his eternal sted with the Lord. At that point you attacked his character yet again as if you were worthy. An admittedly more lofty plane that I inhabit. And let's at least be honest enough to admit that the recognition of ol Bern's socialist palate is by no stretch limited to this forum. Thousands of sources have it just that way. You on the other hand have done exactly nothing to disprove he's a socialist, but given your past nobody expects that. Bernie Sanders says he's a Democratic socialist. You need to get in touch with him and explain how hard stuff like that makes it for you to mount a meaningful defense.

Thread says he's a communist not socialist. That's a whole different article.

America has socialism abound, but not communism nor any major candidates promoting communism.

[Bob Seger]

"Red is red" doesn't answer the question of what are Bernie's communist platforms.


Are you trying to say I am another member of this site?
I've been on here since 2012, but never posted in the Political forum until recently. I've always been Cardfan1 and never anyone else.

I don't think anyone made any mention at all that Redbirdfan1 had ever posted in the political forum before.

[Bob Seger]

Thread says he's a communist not socialist. That's a whole different article.

America has socialism abound, but not communism nor any major candidates promoting communism.

When one states publicly that he is excited by a mass murderer by the name of Fidel, I think that says it all.

[TheRealThing]

Thread says he's a communist not socialist. That's a whole different article.

America has socialism abound, but not communism nor any major candidates promoting communism.

No it isn't either. Socialism is the on-ramp to communism. ABTW, Bern honeymooned in the former Soviet Union. The fact that you're defending socialism in the way you are, does remind me of an ongoing defense somebody a LOT like you waged in support of homosexuality one here.

The socialists are brave enough to admit it, that's true. They're just not stupid enough to call for communism yet. I can't think of a single communist country in history which started off proclaiming the wonders of communism. They all started with wooing the working class and telling them how unfairly they were being treated and how abused they were. The irony in that tack of course is like in our land where upwards of 50% of earned income is deducted from paychecks, it is the government which does the deducting. Sort of like the case where Democrats treat taypayers like vampire prey, and blame it on Republicans.

[Cardfan1]

I don't think anyone made any mention at all that Redbirdfan1 had ever posted in the political forum before.

:lame:

[Cardfan1]

When one states publicly that he is excited by a mass murderer by the name of Fidel, I think that says it all.

His praise of Fidel makes him a communist...?

Trump on Kim Jung Un---

"I was really being tough and so was he," Trump said. "And we would go back and forth. And then we fell in love. No really. He wrote me beautiful letters."

"They were great letters. And then we fell in love," he continued.

Does that make Trump a communist?

[Bob Seger]

His praise of Fidel makes him a communist...?

Trump on Kim Jung Un---

"I was really being tough and so was he," Trump said. "And we would go back and forth. And then we fell in love. No really. He wrote me beautiful letters."

"They were great letters. And then we fell in love," he continued.

Does that make Trump a communist?

You can knock that that junk off, theurbancaveredbird!. Whole different context and you know it!!!

It also doesn't take a friggin genius to figure out that dems are trying to disguise this wave of current democratic push towards communism that they are using term socialism to ease the sting to the masses. The word socialism is what dems use when you want to really say communism, only it's said with a wink and a smile. But these dumbass millennials don't have the first clue what's going on. But you, you should know better.

[Cardfan1]

No it isn't either. Socialism is the on-ramp to communism. ABTW, Bern honeymooned in the former Soviet Union. The fact that you're defending socialism in the way you are, does remind me of an ongoing defense somebody a LOT like you waged in support of homosexuality one here.

The socialists are brave enough to admit it, that's true. They're just not stupid enough to call for communism yet. I can't think of a single communist country in history which started off proclaiming the wonders of communism. They all started with wooing the working class and telling them how unfairly they were being treated and how abused they were. The irony in that tack of course is like in our land where upwards of 50% of earned income is deducted from paychecks, it is the government which does the deducting. Sort of like the case where Democrats treat taypayers like vampire prey, and blame it on Republicans.

Well...there is probably more than one person on the site that shares a differing view.

I'm not defending socialism, communism, or not even Bernie. I would just like to see one of you explain which Sanders platform is communist.

You guys have spouted it for several posts now, but haven't backed it up.

[Cardfan1]

You can knock that that junk off, theurbancaveredbird!. Whole different context and you know it!!!

It also doesn't take a friggin genius to figure out that dems are trying to disguise this wave of current democratic push towards communism that they are using term socialism to ease the sting to the masses. The word socialism is what dems use when you want to really say communism, only it's said with a wink and a smile. But these dumbass millennials don't have the first clue what's going on. But you, you should know better.

I thought when you complimented communists you turn into one.

Socialism and communism are very different. I don't think there is a democrat or Bernie running on communism. They aren't even close. Pretty evident you guys haven't been able to list one.

[TheRealThing]

Well...there is probably more than one person on the site that shares a differing view.

I'm not defending socialism, communism, or not even Bernie. I would just like to see one of you explain which Sanders platform is communist.

You guys have spouted it for several posts now, but haven't backed it up.

Right, and you're all wrong. Socialism leads to communism, and in short order. You are defending Bernie and your ever morphing goal post moving, antilogic notwithstanding; the fact that Bernie is an admitted socialist who has falsely promised free education and healthcare among other things, is an overtly socialist agenda. I've been to his website. The proposed new taxes as opposed to all the free stuff on there stand not only in direct contravention to the American ideals of our past, they make no mathematical sense whatever.

What's laughable is the that you with all-in assuredness, will pin your hopes this fall on the miserable Sanders. :hilarious: All I can say is go for it.

[Cardfan1]

The United States has practiced socialism for over a 100 years now. Must take 200 to get to communism.

As I said earlier in the thread, you guys seem to enjoy some socialism when it goes to the few. Despise it when it means healthcare and education for the many.

You went to his website today after you were pushed to find a communist platform.

I’ll help you Bernie’s socialism is similar to European Socialist ideas. They generally stay out of the economy, but use taxation for social programs. This differs from the recent American corporate socialism practiced by both political parties that have doled out tax breaks and bailouts to corporations, banks, and billionaires.

[TheRealThing]

The United States has practiced socialism for over a 100 years now. Must take 200 to get to communism.

As I said earlier in the thread, you guys seem to enjoy some socialism when it goes to the few. Despise it when it means healthcare and education for the many.

You went to his website today after you were pushed to find a communist platform.

I’ll help you Bernie’s socialism is similar to European Socialist ideas. They generally stay out of the economy, but use taxation for social programs. This differs from the recent American corporate socialism practiced by both political parties that have doled out tax breaks and bailouts to corporations, banks, and billionaires.

Wow, you already sound just like Bernie.

The United States has not practiced socialism. We make weekly contributions to social security. And our employers designate health care as part of our wages. Consequently while we are young and healthy, our contributions to the health industry subsidize others until we start needing the same services when we age. As such those are the only two examples of Keynesian economics that make sense. What we don't like is able bodied men who lay around expecting welfare. People who do work are forced to pay the bill for that.

In the Eurozone people expect things to be handed to them too. Because of the onset of socialism in the Eurozone, countries like Greece, Italy, and France are teetering on collapse. Socialist policies do not work, and thus England has made her exit.

[Cardfan1]

Wow, you already sound just like Bernie.

The United States has not practiced socialism. We make weekly contributions to social security. And our employers designate health care as part of our wages. Consequently while we are young and healthy, our contributions to the health industry subsidize others until we start needing the same services when we age. As such those are the only two examples of Keynesian economics that make sense. What we don't like is able bodied men who lay around expecting welfare. People who do work are forced to pay the bill for that.

In the Eurozone people expect things to be handed to them too. Because of the onset of socialism in the Eurozone, countries like Greece, Italy, and France are teetering on collapse. Socialist policies do not work, and thus England has made her exit.

“This country has socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor.”

-Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, 1968

That was 1968 if MLK could only see it now.

Maybe I am. I do know the last two presidents have handed out hundreds of BILLIONS to corporations over bad policies and risky borrowing. None of it the fault of the average American citizen. We are on the hook while the culprits skate away with millions or billions in the bank.

You're turning a blind eye to the market socialism and focusing on the human services wing of socialism. Why? Why does that dig in the right wing's craw that some of their money will go to someone less than them, but have no problem when the rich aren't expected to pay their share?

Also you don't elect to do those deductions, so it's socialism.
Don't worry if Congress passes the recent 4.8 trillion dollar budget recommended by the president the death of those social programs will begin, and that part of socialism will die. I guarantee the part where we prop up markets will still exist though.

I'm no economist, but didn't the Eurodebt crisis occur in the wake of our Great Recession? Banks had done the exact same thing ours had done by leveraging too many of their assets on the US and global markets. It had little to do with people wanting handouts.

[TheRealThing]

“This country has socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor.”

-Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, 1968

That was 1968 if MLK could only see it now.

Maybe I am. I do know the last two presidents have handed out hundreds of BILLIONS to corporations over bad policies and risky borrowing. None of it the fault of the average American citizen. We are on the hook while the culprits skate away with millions or billions in the bank.

You're turning a blind eye to the market socialism and focusing on the human services wing of socialism. Why? Why does that dig in the right wing's craw that some of their money will go to someone less than them, but have no problem when the rich aren't expected to pay their share?

Also you don't elect to do those deductions, so it's socialism.
Don't worry if Congress passes the recent 4.8 trillion dollar budget recommended by the president the death of those social programs will begin, and that part of socialism will die. I guarantee the part where we prop up markets will still exist though.

I'm no economist, but didn't the Eurodebt crisis occur in the wake of our Great Recession? Banks had done the exact same thing ours had done by leveraging too many of their assets on the US and global markets. It had little to do with people wanting handouts.

Saying the market is socialist just might be the goofiest thing you've said yet.

Bolded -- No that's for certain. You're no student of history either. And your batting average falls off from that point where it comes to discerning current events.

The recession of note didn't even hit the US until it was in full swing across Europe. Even then it was the moronic machinations of Barney Frank, ordering the financial district to give loans to people who had not a ghost of a chance of repaying, that tipped the equation. The real head banger is in recognizing that Democrats didn't learn a thing from the housing bubble burst. Just give the people stuff. Along comes Bernie Sanders and you guys are all-in. Along comes AOC and you're all-in. From my perspective liberals would back Satan himself if he ran. The only qualifier is to oppose conservative values and for libs, it's all good.

The people, who BTW know that their federal government is of, by and for the people, proceeded to elect Republican majorities in the Congress and then proceeded to install a Republican President. The unelected deepstate and Democrat Conference of the Congress then proceeded to go to war with the people, and tried to rob them of their government. And you're on here and I'm sure other places. cheerleading for the left cause and pleading your case as if it made any sense at all or any merit whatever. You know where would freeze over before you'll sell a true conservative of a thing.


Trying to get the edge by playing the race card huh? The US isn't perfect and it will never be perfect. That doesn't change the fact that anybody can rise from obscurity and become President. Obama ring a bell? We have equality of opportunity and freedom of religion here. People are supposed to work. And people who're not born rich are not oppressed.

[Cardfan1]

Saying the market is socialist just might be the goofiest thing you've said yet.

Bolded -- No that's for certain. You're no student of history either. And your batting average falls off from that point where it comes to discerning current events.

The recession of note didn't even hit the US until it was in full swing across Europe. Even then it was the moronic machinations of Barney Frank, ordering the financial district to give loans to people who had not a ghost of a chance of repaying, that tipped the equation. The real head banger is in recognizing that Democrats didn't learn a thing from the housing bubble burst. Just give the people stuff. Along comes Bernie Sanders and you guys are all-in. Along comes AOC and you're all-in. From my perspective liberals would back Satan himself if he ran. The only qualifier is to oppose conservative values and for libs, it's all good.

The people, who BTW know that their federal government is of, by and for the people, proceeded to elect Republican majorities in the Congress and then proceeded to install a Republican President. The unelected deepstate and Democrat Conference of the Congress then proceeded to go to war with the people, and tried to rob them of their government. And you're on here and I'm sure other places. cheerleading for the left cause and pleading your case as if it made any sense at all or any merit whatever. You know where would freeze over before you'll sell a true conservative of a thing.


Trying to get the edge by playing the race card huh? The US isn't perfect and it will never be perfect. That doesn't change the fact that anybody can rise from obscurity and become President. Obama ring a bell? We have equality of opportunity and freedom of religion here. People are supposed to work. And people who're not born rich are not oppressed.

Really...what do you call the 28 billion sent to farmers this year to subsidize the loss from tariffs (socialist in their own right)? Massive tax breaks to fossil fuel industries? Or at the state level, investing in failed Aluminum plants? None of that is free market economy, and the amount of money invested could help millions of American citizens rather than bailout few.

Batting average a little higher than yours. You may want to review your Eurozone debt crisis facts: "The Eurozone debt crisis is a multi-year debt crisis that has been taking place in the European Union since the end of 2009."

MLK was an American who fought for poor people all over this nation. No race card; I hate you drew that connection.

The amount of money at the top of the ladder in this nation mirrors the corrupt era of the late 1800's. Since you know your history, you'll know that a massive progressive wave pushed through the nation ushering in many changes. Some can be seen as good and others as monumental failures, but one thing that can't be debated is the fact that inequality and corruption caused a fundamental revolution.

Personally, I would rather see a mini-controlled revolution redistributing some of the wealth on healthcare and education and infrastructure to improve society. Another 20 years at this pace and you may be right, an extreme govt will be in our forecast.

[TheRealThing]

Really...what do you call the 28 billion sent to farmers this year to subsidize the loss from tariffs (socialist in their own right)? Massive tax breaks to fossil fuel industries? Or at the state level, investing in failed Aluminum plants? None of that is free market economy, and the amount of money invested could help millions of American citizens rather than bailout few.

Batting average a little higher than yours. You may want to review your Eurozone debt crisis facts: "The Eurozone debt crisis is a multi-year debt crisis that has been taking place in the European Union since the end of 2009."

MLK was an American who fought for poor people all over this nation. No race card; I hate you drew that connection.

The amount of money at the top of the ladder in this nation mirrors the corrupt era of the late 1800's. Since you know your history, you'll know that a massive progressive wave pushed through the nation ushering in many changes. Some can be seen as good and others as monumental failures, but one thing that can't be debated is the fact that inequality and corruption caused a fundamental revolution.

Personally, I would rather see a mini-controlled revolution redistributing some of the wealth on healthcare and education and infrastructure to improve society. Another 20 years at this pace and you may be right, an extreme govt will be in our forecast.

There was a global economic downturn beginning in 2007 actually. Obama sidestepped that and blamed the whole thing on George W Bush. Never waste a crisis, right? As I recall he blamed W ad nauseum. I was alive and kicking then and my memory of 2007 onward is superlative for the record. Not the first word of what I wrote is in error. I know what happened, I was part of it. You a teacher there Cardfan? You talk down to folks like it's second nature. That tack might serve in the classroom, but it fails when you get out in the real world. In any case, I don't develop my perspective by assimilating talking points or adopting other people's opinions. And I am certain that we are not likely to ever agree on your batting average.

Thank you I do know my history in fact, well enough to know a lot of people and textbook writers have taken a lot of liberties with accuracy of late. MLK was a great man, and one whom fought for the civil rights of black people. His message IMHO, could be adequately summed up in one sentence from his "I Have a Dream Speech." MLK's fond hope was that 'one day all men would be judged on the content of their character, and not the color of their skin.' Noble enough, but honestly though man has made progress to that end, I doubt that is possible this side of the Lord's Millennium.

Like civil rights progress, the social upheaval of which you speak was a world wide phenomenon, not relegated to just the US. Aristocrats and industrial big wigs got their attitude adjustments thanks to the efforts of labor unions and social pressure. Why can't you connect the dots without the predictable detour through La-La Land? But what I know is, I wouldn't want somebody like you deciding how much money should be positioned at the 'top of the ladder.' And I mean you've got to be kidding, you thought you needed to tell me you advocate for wealth redistribution? LOL.

My prediction is you'll get to see some form of revolution, but I don't think you're going to be very happy with what you see. I suspect you're hoping a mini revolution is about to erupt right now. That way all us conservatives would be shuffled and stacked according to the liberal view of things whether we like it or not. You really think the have nots hate only white Republicans but love white Dems? :eyeroll:

[Bob Seger]

"Don't be fooled by Bernie Sanders - he's a diehard communist"

~ The New York Post

https://nypost/2016/01/16/dont-be-fooled...dzlhgWHzdo

[TheRealThing]

"Don't be fooled by Bernie Sanders - he's a diehard communist"

~ The New York Post

https://nypost/2016/01/16/dont-be-fooled...dzlhgWHzdo

LOL, Cardfan wants a pup out of him.

[Cardfan1]

There was a global economic downturn beginning in 2007 actually. Obama sidestepped that and blamed the whole thing on George W Bush. Never waste a crisis, right? As I recall he blamed W ad nauseum. I was alive and kicking then and my memory of 2007 onward is superlative for the record. Not the first word of what I wrote is in error. I know what happened, I was part of it. You a teacher there Cardfan? You talk down to folks like it's second nature. That tack might serve in the classroom, but it fails when you get out in the real world. In any case, I don't develop my perspective by assimilating talking points or adopting other people's opinions. And I am certain that we are not likely to ever agree on your batting average.

Thank you I do know my history in fact, well enough to know a lot of people and textbook writers have taken a lot of liberties with accuracy of late. MLK was a great man, and one whom fought for the civil rights of black people. His message IMHO, could be adequately summed up in one sentence from his "I Have a Dream Speech." MLK's fond hope was that 'one day all men would be judged on the content of their character, and not the color of their skin.' Noble enough, but honestly though man has made progress to that end, I doubt that is possible this side of the Lord's Millennium.

Like civil rights progress, the social upheaval of which you speak was a world wide phenomenon, not relegated to just the US. Aristocrats and industrial big wigs got their attitude adjustments thanks to the efforts of labor unions and social pressure. Why can't you connect the dots without the predictable detour through La-La Land? But what I know is, I wouldn't want somebody like you deciding how much money should be positioned at the 'top of the ladder.' And I mean you've got to be kidding, you thought you needed to tell me you advocate for wealth redistribution? LOL.

My prediction is you'll get to see some form of revolution, but I don't think you're going to be very happy with what you see. I suspect you're hoping a mini revolution is about to erupt right now. That way all us conservatives would be shuffled and stacked according to the liberal view of things whether we like it or not. You really think the have nots hate only white Republicans but love white Dems? :eyeroll:

Wait...was it handouts by a socialist government or a 2007 global downturn? Starting to twist into a pretzel.

I apologize if you feel I’ve talked down to you. I enjoy a good discussion. I do try to back up my arguments with facts, so if that comes across as know-it-all it’s because I just confirmed it with more than one source.

There is a parallel between the Progressive era and today.

40 years of stagnant wages and massive income inequality. The strength of unions has been weakened by “right to work” laws and the outsourcing of manufacturing (losing a huge social pressure block). Young adults, Middle and lower class frustration is growing. Some may have voted for Trump in 2016, but they are getting nothing but the same.

No, I don’t think the have nots only hate Republicans. Sanders isn’t a democrat, which explains a good portion of his support.

[TheRealThing]

> Wait...was it handouts by a socialist government or a 2007 global downturn? Starting to twist into a pretzel.

> I apologize if you feel I’ve talked down to you. I enjoy a good discussion. I do try to back up my arguments with facts, so if that comes across as know-it-all it’s because I just confirmed it with more than one source.

> There is a parallel between the Progressive era and today.

40 years of stagnant wages and massive income inequality. The strength of unions has been weakened by “right to work” laws and the outsourcing of manufacturing (losing a huge social pressure block). Young adults, Middle and lower class frustration is growing. Some may have voted for Trump in 2016, but they are getting nothing but the same.

> No, I don’t think the have nots only hate Republicans. Sanders isn’t a democrat, which explains a good portion of his support.

> Yes I think to a large extent, it was. The idea of a Eurozone was first kicked around in modern times during the 40's. Remember, Churchill envisioned a post war united states of Europe. And failing NAZI victory, Hitler put a plan in place to effectuate post WW2, in order to accomplish his goals by seeding covert deepstate operatives in the governments across Europe. (sound familiar?) But the actual inception of any European imitation of the United States of America, has always been a daunting broad spectrum proposition. Not the least of such obstacles has been money/budgetary issues. For example: WIKI--- "However, any success (in formation of the European Union) was overshadowed by the budget Crisis in March 1999."

We here in the US grew into global prominence over the lifetime of our nation. Just snapping one's fingers so to speak, in order to emulate our success is comparatively a much harder accomplishment. The US did nonetheless 'move over' in the industrial sense to allow Europe's success. And the 100 Billion donated toward the formation of the EU as part of the Marshall Plan, has been credited with getting the EU formation across the finish line. At any rate Europeans do have a particularly socialist palate. And various countries of the EU have teetered on the brink and required bailouts along the way.

> You lecture, and if you actually do source you don't tell anyone else about it. But thanks for the apology.

> Where you see progressive parallels, I see life on planet earth.
"Life is hard, then you die. Then they throw dirt in your face. Then the worms eat you. Be grateful it happens in that order." --- David Gerrold

1 Peter 4:12 (KJV)
12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:

Man sinned and fell from grace. God cursed the ground for his sake, and life has been tough ever since. I know why this truth has fallen from favor, but the fact that it has in no way mitigates the reality of same. We/men, are not born with any 'right' to an accepted level of privilege, or ease of existence. Man is to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow/face. This idea that man is somehow noble and deserving of a dignified lifestyle despite his station or the absurdity of unwillingness to work for same, is bogus. In this country however, God's blessing is abundant and there is equality of opportunity no matter who you are.

> I wasn't speaking of Bernie, I was speaking of the Democrat Party. They've cultivated every conceivable special interest, and had minorities and blue collar folks in the bag for so long they don't believe it is even possible to fall from favor with them. I believe that's a ridiculous leap. Just as I believe the racial pot stirring that Dems have been guilty of has nonetheless come to a rolling boil. And, I believe, the donkey is about to get his hair scalded off as a result. In other words, in the end I don't believe one can focus racial foment politically, or narrowly for that matter. Race transcends politics and I don't know how to break this to my Democrat friends but, most of them are white.

[Cardfan1]

> Yes I think to a large extent, it was. The idea of a Eurozone was first kicked around in modern times during the 40's. Remember, Churchill envisioned a post war united states of Europe. And failing NAZI victory, Hitler put a plan in place to effectuate post WW2, in order to accomplish his goals by seeding covert deepstate operatives in the governments across Europe. (sound familiar?) But the actual inception of any European imitation of the United States of America, has always been a daunting broad spectrum proposition. Not the least of such obstacles has been money/budgetary issues. For example: WIKI--- "However, any success (in formation of the European Union) was overshadowed by the budget Crisis in March 1999."

We here in the US grew into global prominence over the lifetime of our nation. Just snapping one's fingers so to speak, in order to emulate our success is comparatively a much harder accomplishment. The US did nonetheless 'move over' in the industrial sense to allow Europe's success. And the 100 Billion donated toward the formation of the EU as part of the Marshall Plan, has been credited with getting the EU formation across the finish line. At any rate Europeans do have a particularly socialist palate. And various countries of the EU have teetered on the brink and required bailouts along the way.

> You lecture, and if you actually do source you don't tell anyone else about it. But thanks for the apology.

> Where you see progressive parallels, I see life on planet earth.
"Life is hard, then you die. Then they throw dirt in your face. Then the worms eat you. Be grateful it happens in that order." --- David Gerrold

1 Peter 4:12 (KJV)
12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:

Man sinned and fell from grace. God cursed the ground for his sake, and life has been tough ever since. I know why this truth has fallen from favor, but the fact that it has in no way mitigates the reality of same. We/men, are not born with any 'right' to an accepted level of privilege, or ease of existence. Man is to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow/face. This idea that man is somehow noble and deserving of a dignified lifestyle despite his station or the absurdity of unwillingness to work for same, is bogus. In this country however, God's blessing is abundant and there is equality of opportunity no matter who you are.

> I wasn't speaking of Bernie, I was speaking of the Democrat Party. They've cultivated every conceivable special interest, and had minorities and blue collar folks in the bag for so long they don't believe it is even possible to fall from favor with them. I believe that's a ridiculous leap. Just as I believe the racial pot stirring that Dems have been guilty of has nonetheless come to a rolling boil. And, I believe, the donkey is about to get his hair scalded off as a result. In other words, in the end I don't believe one can focus racial foment politically, or narrowly for that matter. Race transcends politics and I don't know how to break this to my Democrat friends but, most of them are white.

The fact you’re calling me out for lecturing and talking down is the epitome irony.

Don’t forget we have required bailouts too.

Notice I never said Republicans are the only ones that will potentially face a revolution.

[TheRealThing]

The fact you’re calling me out for lecturing and talking down is the epitome irony.

Don’t forget we have required bailouts too.

Notice I never said Republicans are the only ones that will potentially face a revolution.

You don't think I can tell historical trues, facts and current events from DNC talking points?

US bailouts were largely successful, absorbed by the taxpayer/economy, and with the notable exception of Democrat run cities, life goes on. Not that that means I agreed with them. Eurozone bailouts however, are a different animal. EU local governments have already burdened taxpayers to the point where they have basically hit the wall. (I give you Brexit) And because following the bailouts European leaders went right on handing out the goodies and not changing their spending habits, those bailouts were largely unsuccessful. As the result the EU is in even bigger trouble than recent years. Greece, Italy, France and Portugal are among those in the EU with a public debt burden that eclipses their entire annual economic output. Greece's public debt ratio is 183% of their annual economy.

I never said you said the first word about it. I said that. Why? Because of the endless parade of Democrat politicians on TV blaming Republicans and downing white politicians and enabling minority civil unrest. Another old white guy they say. Then Bernie Sanders steps up as the 2020 frontrunner and they go into a panic. I just pointed out you can't pour gas on our political system and expect that only the parts you don't like will get burned up. That and the fact that there is a certain poetic justice about that in view of the game Dems have been playing.