>> ^quantumushroom:

In order for one to be fired, one first must have a job. obamanomics brilliantly skips the middleman. No one hired = no one fired!
Two trillion dollars. Two trillion dollars in the hands of American consumers, patiently waiting for the Supreme Court obamacare verdict and the marxist buffoon to be kicked out.


When Obama gets re-elected, I am going to open a nice bottle of single malt, pour myself a glass and add a little drop of water. As I do this, I will imagine the water is your tears and I will smile contentedly.

In order for one to be fired, one first must have a job. obamanomics brilliantly skips the middleman. No one hired = no one fired!

Two trillion dollars. Two trillion dollars in the hands of American consumers, patiently waiting for the Supreme Court obamacare verdict and the marxist buffoon to be kicked out.

I know SOPA is bad, and I also know that the majority of Congress and the Executive Branch are still run by taxocrats. Pray tell me, how is this atrocious legislation the fault of conservatives?

Don't get me wrong, the right wing has failed...by not being right wingy enough.

>> ^volumptuous:

Waiting for QM and Winston to show up and explain to us how being anti-SOPA is actually being marxist/communist/big gov't

Waiting for QM and Winston to show up and explain to us how being anti-SOPA is actually being marxist/communist/big gov't

>> ^lantern53:

Yeah, ALL the (R) contenders are crackpot.
Obama, on the other hand, who was raised in a madrassa, who's father is a socialist, who's pastor is an anti-semite, who's buddies are marxist (Frank Marshall Davis) or former terrorists, who comes from the Chicago political machine...
yeah, he's perfectly normal!


Wow! That guy sounds really interesting!

Obummer is one of two things: a complete idiot who will never see the connection between his good intentions and the negative results they yield

OR

an America-hating marxist who knows EXACTLY what he's doing.

@chilaxe

What does this video have to do AT ALL with ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION?! Nothin.

So why don't you "chilax" with all your "cognitive complexity" master race, jingoist, racist, segregationist rhetoric.

Immigration by non-whites ≠ Socialism

You're scapegoating on minorities cause dim to understand something as cognitively complex as: helping other human beings.


And just FYI, Randall Parkers racist, jingoist, segregationist tirades from a collection of opinion articles entitled - Immigration Societal Decay - DOES NOT qualify as "evidence" of marxist communist EVIIIL socialist experiments in the US.. or anywhere for that matter.



..you old racist ass, anti-multiculturist bigot.

According to his biography by Michael Eric Dyson, ML King considered himself a Marxist, but not a Communist. He is usually described as a democratic socialist. He believed the US was on the wrong side of the Vietnam war and that the US should've been on the side of the North Vietnamese. He did think there should be radical wealth distribution in the US.

Actually the failures in "socialist Europe" are down to capitalists fucking things up. OTOH places like Norway which has essentially nationalised it's oil industry are actually doing well.

Of course you're going to blame "capitalists" for socialism's downfall, what choice do you have? Norway? Great example! The were smart enough to stay OUT of the EU. However, in 30 years, when the oil runs low...

As for your Obama quote, I don't actually think you have read it correctly because it doesn't even remotely support your position, not that you've ever let reality intrude on your juvenile little rants.

The quote is quite apt. A king decides who may and who may not prosper in his kingdom. A US President daring to decide the same? TYRANNY.

And Marx? You remind me of Zapp Brannigan: we don't know anything about them, so we can only assume they stand for everything we don't stand for!


Everything I've written about marx is accurate. Please point to some real-world examples of free, prosperous marxist nations.


>> ^ChaosEngine:

Actually the failures in "socialist Europe" are down to capitalists fucking things up. OTOH places like Norway which has essentially nationalised it's oil industry are actually doing well.
As for your Obama quote, I don't actually think you have read it correctly because it doesn't even remotely support your position, not that you've ever let reality intrude on your juvenile little rants.
And Marx? You remind me of Zapp Brannigan: we don't know anything about them, so we can only assume they stand for everything we don't stand for!
>> ^quantumushroom:
Not overly interested in whether my comrades here think I sufficiently understand marx, he's the left's savior, not mine. Not only was marx a lousy human being and horrible in his personal handling of money, he thought the profit motive could be stripped from the system and it would work just as well.
Then we get this from His Earness:
“You don’t have some inherent right just to–-you know, get a certain amount of profit."
Words more befitting the late, ungreat kim ill-dong
Is 3.5 years of this idiot's failures not enough for ya? You need 4 more? Hey, Siftberals, take a peek at socialist Europe, broke as a joke and falling apart. THIS is the crap you want for the US?
Anyone-But-His-Earness 2012

Hey QM, who is your favorite nominee so far to go against Obama? What makes them your favorite?>> ^quantumushroom:

taxocrats are hoping Paul will get the nomination (he won't) so the marxist could run easy, deceptive ads about what a kook Paul is.
I'd vote for Kook Paul over the marxist.

I think the whole notion that Iowa gets invalidated if Paul wins is bogus.

That said, Paul is not a threat at all to Obama in the general. He has too many fringe views on domestic and foreign policy. Even aside from my pet peeve (civil rights), most Americans, despite their lip service otherwise, are for big federal government programs, departments, and institutions that Paul would abolish or severely cut.

It would also be easy to portray Paul as a lame duck president on day one, one that would have problems rallying his own caucus in congress to enact his policies.>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^quantumushroom:
taxocrats are hoping Paul will get the nomination (he won't) so the marxist could run easy, deceptive ads about what a kook Paul is.
I would be greatly surprised if any significant number of Obama supporters would be pulling for Ron Paul because they think he'd be an easy opponent.
I feel like Paul and Romney are the only candidates that can pose a threat. Paul has a loyal anti-war following that crosses party lines and Romney is probably far more popular among independents than any of the other Republicans and maybe even Obama. The biggest hurdle for either of these guys is to win over their own party. Actually, I think Huntsman would have a good chance in the general election as well. He just can't seem to get anyone to pay attention to him now.
But the point is, Paul is not the "easy win" for Obama. Bachmann is. Cain probably would have been. Santorum is, too.
I'd vote for Paul next year as well, if he's there. Especially if we get Gary Johnson on the card with him. Normally I don't care that much about the VP, but at Paul's age we need a good backup plan.

>> ^artician:

>> ^quantumushroom:
taxocrats are hoping Paul will get the nomination (he won't) so the marxist could run easy, deceptive ads about what a kook Paul is.
I'd vote for Kook Paul over the marxist.

Have your read Marx? I just want to know if you understand what that means, or if you're just talking out of your ass.


QM thinks Karl Marx was the one who honked a horn instead of talking.

>> ^quantumushroom:

taxocrats are hoping Paul will get the nomination (he won't) so the marxist could run easy, deceptive ads about what a kook Paul is.

I would be greatly surprised if any significant number of Obama supporters would be pulling for Ron Paul because they think he'd be an easy opponent.

I feel like Paul and Romney are the only candidates that can pose a threat. Paul has a loyal anti-war following that crosses party lines and Romney is probably far more popular among independents than any of the other Republicans and maybe even Obama. The biggest hurdle for either of these guys is to win over their own party. Actually, I think Huntsman would have a good chance in the general election as well. He just can't seem to get anyone to pay attention to him now.

But the point is, Paul is not the "easy win" for Obama. Bachmann is. Cain probably would have been. Santorum is, too.

I'd vote for Paul next year as well, if he's there. Especially if we get Gary Johnson on the card with him. Normally I don't care that much about the VP, but at Paul's age we need a good backup plan.

QM: Does not agree with me? Marxist.