FOX has been right all along, which is one of the reasons

[Raoul_Luke]

Comey said when he was in college he was left of center, he later saw the republican party as more in line with his opinions. He was also hired by Giuliani. So I guess you have a comment about his being an idiot, no?

Not so long ago you righties thought Comey was a great guy....not so much when he tells you the truth about Trump. I noticed Trump thought he was a great guy until his suggestion to drop the investigation of Flynn fell on deaf ears and Trump didn't get his pledge of undying loyalty...right?

Link to me ever saying anything nice about Guliani or Comey…ever! You can't because I never have.

The fact is that an alarming number of Obama Administration officials are turning out to be admitted Marxists (either now or in the past).

 

[middleview]

Link to me ever saying anything nice about Guliani or Comey…ever! You can't because I never have.

The fact is that an alarming number of Obama Administration officials are turning out to be admitted Marxists (either now or in the past).

Admitted Marxists? Well...no that never happened, but in any case those two were hired by republicans....

So I guess every president who spent time in the White House without doing away with any form of taxation is confiscating wealth and is therefore a Marxist.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Admitted Marxists? Well...no that never happened, but in any case those two were hired by republicans....

So I guess every president who spent time in the White House without doing away with any form of taxation is confiscating wealth and is therefore a Marxist.

So you vote for a communist because you are a capitalist then? Um, no, the very idea refutes itself. I used to be a anti-war lefty in the 70s. But I never voted for an openly communist candidate for any office, because I have always been a capitalist.

Every President who has supported increasing redistribution of wealth is advocating Marxist policy. Lets face it, "redistribution of wealth" is the (reductivist) essence of "from each according to ability, to each according to need."

 

[middleview]

So you vote for a communist because you are a capitalist then? Um, no, the very idea refutes itself. I used to be a anti-war lefty in the 70s. But I never voted for an openly communist candidate for any office, because I have always been a capitalist.

Every President who has supported increasing redistribution of wealth is advocating Marxist policy. Lets face it, "redistribution of wealth" is the (reductivist) essence of "from each according to ability, to each according to need."

1. As a college student with your first vote for president, two shitty candidates and the knowledge that Gus Hall isn't getting elected...yeah he cast a protest vote.

2. Reagan increased taxes. Bush increased taxes. Were they Marxists?

In any case, "leveling the playing field" isn't equal to "from each...blah,blah".
Spreading the wealth could mean the recognition that there is a wealth of opportunity and spreading it around is a good idea...in the form of help to get a college education, small business loans, progressive taxation....etc....

 

[Raoul_Luke]

1. As a college student with your first vote for president, two shitty candidates and the knowledge that Gus Hall isn't getting elected...yeah he cast a protest vote.

2. Reagan increased taxes. Bush increased taxes. Were they Marxists?

In any case, "leveling the playing field" isn't equal to "from each...blah,blah".
Spreading the wealth could mean the recognition that there is a wealth of opportunity and spreading it around is a good idea...in the form of help to get a college education, small business loans, progressive taxation....etc....

Donald Duck is a "protest vote." You have to have some sympathy with any actual candidate's platform in order to vote for them over the other actual candidates. It's intellectual lazy to suggest an early vote for a commie was a "protest" vote (unless, of course, you are "protesting" capitalism).

In any case, "leveling the playing field" is implementing policies that treat everyone the same. The fact that you see using political power to confiscate wealth from those who have it in order to give it to those who do not as "leveling the playing field" says way more about your ideological underpinnings than I bet you think you are revealing.

 

[middleview]

Donald Duck is a "protest vote." You have to have some sympathy with any actual candidate's platform in order to vote for them over the other actual candidates. It's intellectual lazy to suggest an early vote for a commie was a "protest" vote (unless, of course, you are "protesting" capitalism).

In any case, "leveling the playing field" is implementing policies that treat everyone the same. The fact that you see using political power to confiscate wealth from those who have it in order to give it to those who do not as "leveling the playing field" says way more about your ideological underpinnings than I bet you think you are revealing.

It is exactly how he described it...a protest vote...and no, you don't have to have any sympathy for a candidate you know is going to lose.

If that vote is all you have...you lose.

If you think everybody in this country has the same opportunities as everyone else...you're nuts.

 

[middleview]

Link to me ever saying anything nice about Guliani or Comey…ever! You can't because I never have.

The fact is that an alarming number of Obama Administration officials are turning out to be admitted Marxists (either now or in the past).

You have one guy joking he was a communist and suddenly switched to republican....that is not a credible admission of being a marxist.

You have another guy admitting to casting one vote 50 years ago for the communist candidate....someone guaranteed to lose.

You call that alarming? What about the nazi that Trump brought into the White House? How about the alarming number of tax cheats he appointed? Your selective sense of alarm is pretty funny.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

You have one guy joking he was a communist and suddenly switched to republican....that is not a credible admission of being a marxist.

You have another guy admitting to casting one vote 50 years ago for the communist candidate....someone guaranteed to lose.

You call that alarming? What about the nazi that Trump brought into the White House? How about the alarming number of tax cheats he appointed? Your selective sense of alarm is pretty funny.

When have I ever suggested that I supported any of Trump's appointments?

 

[middleview]

When have I ever suggested that I supported any of Trump's appointments?

When did you ever suggest Trump is a nazi because he appointed Gorka to work in the White House?

 

[Raoul_Luke]

When did you ever suggest Trump is a nazi because he appointed Gorka to work in the White House?

So then, Gorka is a self admitted "Nazi?" Or are you just making shit up to fit your narrative again? When did he vote for a self identified Nazi candidate for President?

 

[middleview]

So then, Gorka is a self admitted "Nazi?" Or are you just making shit up to fit your narrative again? When did he vote for a self identified Nazi candidate for President?

He belongs to a nazi organization. He isn't honest enough to say who he voted for.

 

[EatTheRich]

How do you "spread the wealth around" without first "confiscating" it? This is pretty simple and strait forward stuff. The idea that you think he's not advocating for the "confiscation of private property" in that comment says more about you than it does about him. You are either clueless or lying - which is it?

I rate your comment half-true.

What is true: there is no way to increase the wealth of all the poor permanently without seizing the wealth of, and thereby breaking the political power of, the rich who must keep the masses poor and regard technological progress so they can enjoy capitalist wealth which they falsely think is the pinnacle of wealth for our species.

What is false: Obama and other liberal politicians believe that wealth can be spread around by adopting “pro-prosperity” policies that result in “good jobs” and “high wages.”

 

[EatTheRich]

Of course. A Fruedian slip is far more indicative of a person's internal values than their political proposals. His "record" is, in fact, one in which every major proposal contained some (usually much) wealth redistributionary components. You, as usual, demand that we only consider the fact that he wasn't a hammer and sickle waving openly Marxist self professed extremist to determine whether or not he was a Marxist. I think it is safe to say his claimed effort to "fundamentally transform" America had obvious Marxist overtones. It isn't a coincidence that he just happened to put "former" Marxists in charge of the CIA and FBI (and I suspect you don't have to look to deeply into Clapper's background to find "pinko"). Nor is it a coincidence that immediately after he left office, openly socialist politicians began taking control of the Democratic party. Unlike you, I go by what people do, not what they say.

He didn’t put any “former” Marxist in charge of the FBI. And Brennan was a “former Marxist” only in the very loose sense that he voted for a Communist Party candidate at a time when the Communist Party gave lip service to Marxism but had long since repudiated nearly everything Marx stood for.

 

[EatTheRich]

Bush was an idiot so I'm sure he knew absolutely nothing about Comey when he appointed him. So now he's "left of center?" Just mere months ago you lefties were claiming he was a rock ribbed Republican!

How on earth is taxation anything BUT "confiscation?" Is payment of taxes voluntary???? Sheesh...

No, he was “left of center” as a Carter Democrat, which he jokingly described as a “communist” position after becoming a Reagan Democrat.

 

[EatTheRich]

Confiscating taxpayers at gunpoint for the purpose of "redistributing" money is armed robbery

Since virtually all that money went to General Electric, General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Lockheed Martin, McDonnell Douglas, Intel, Hewlett Packard, IBM, Pepsi, Hollywood, Archer Daniels Midland, etc., taxpayers have every right to take back their robbed wealth by expropriating those companies.

 

[EatTheRich]

So you vote for a communist because you are a capitalist then? Um, no, the very idea refutes itself. I used to be a anti-war lefty in the 70s. But I never voted for an openly communist candidate for any office, because I have always been a capitalist.

Every President who has supported increasing redistribution of wealth is advocating Marxist policy. Lets face it, "redistribution of wealth" is the (reductivist) essence of "from each according to ability, to each according to need."

Brennan said he voted for Gus Hall in 1976, a time when the Communist Party was basically a carbon copy of the Democratic Party but more supportive of welfare and union organizing.

 

[middleview]

So then, Gorka is a self admitted "Nazi?" Or are you just making shit up to fit your narrative again? When did he vote for a self identified Nazi candidate for President?

when you voted for a democrat, did that make you a democrat?

 

[Raoul_Luke]

Brennan said he voted for Gus Hall in 1976, a time when the Communist Party was basically a carbon copy of the Democratic Party but more supportive of welfare and union organizing.

Yes, and as a lefty at the time, I didn't. This idea that Jimmy Carter was such a horrible candidate that right minded Democrats and "center-left" voters needed to register a protest vote for Gus Hall is absurd. Carter turned out to be a horrible President (which nobody knew in 1976), but he was likely the most decent man ever to run for the office.

Now, if your over arching point is that the Democrats are communists who are either confused or lying when they say they are capitalists, then I would tend to accept that argument.

 

[Raoul_Luke]

when you voted for a democrat, did that make you a democrat?

For all intents and purposes, yes. It means you are aligning with their agenda, for good or ill. Why would you vote for a candidate that you were diametrically opposed to ideologically?

 

[EatTheRich]

Yes, and as a lefty at the time, I didn't. This idea that Jimmy Carter was such a horrible candidate that right minded Democrats and "center-left" voters needed to register a protest vote for Gus Hall is absurd. Carter turned out to be a horrible President (which nobody knew in 1976), but he was likely the most decent man ever to run for the office.

Now, if your over arching point is that the Democrats are communists who are either confused or lying when they say they are capitalists, then I would tend to accept that argument.

Carter posed with a Confederate flag. His mom attended a Klan rally while he was on the campaign trail.