Rave this; if you think Marxism is taking this country in the wrong direction.

"Marxism is the system of socialism of which the dominant feature is public ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange"
http://www.allaboutphilosophy...

As there is no actual Marxism behind any American policies whatsoever, I can only wonder what it is you think Marxism means.

Really? A government run single payer system is right around the corner buddy. Wake the hell up!!!!!!

And you still don't have a clue what Marxism is.

Not sure what posting pictures of yourself has to do with anything.

maybe not yet, but if Obama gets his way;

At risk from Agenda 21;

Private Property ownership
Single-Family homes
Private car ownership and individual travel choices
Privately owned farms

The Agenda 21 plan openly targets private property. For over thirty-five years the UN has made their stance very clear on the issue of individuals owning land;

Land… cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interest of society as a whole.

Ah, the ever-effective "if Obama gets his way" fear-mongering. Just like how we were promised that if he got elected in 2008 he'd be taking everyone's guns away, right?

Like he promised for an open administration?
Like he promised to decrease both un-employment and the deficit?
Like he promised to - well, no use talking to a brick wall is there?

What exactly does your reply have to do with my point?

Do you see any blurring of lines here? If the Affordable Health Care Act dictates what customers the business must accept, what profit they are allowed, what they must cover, what bonuses are paid to employees, etc, at what point does it become de facto, public ownership?

Or, on the other side, since Medicare, which I assume you would accept as public ownership of distribution, etc, only works through private companies, is it a government medical plan or a private medical plan.

"Since the beginning of the Medicare program, CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services), has contracted with private companies to operate as intermediaries between the government and medical providers.[16] These contractors are commonly already in the insurance or health care area. Contracted processes include claims and payment processing, call center services, clinician enrollment, and fraud investigation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

If it quacks like a duck, perhaps it is a duck. What do you see as the difference, if any, between Medicare and Affordable HealthCare?

You're confusing regulation with ownership.

That was my point. Why bother with owning stuff when you can effectively regulate companies to the point that you control them? Medicare is public health insurance despite the private company ownership of the claim processing.
Probably there will never be Marxism based on the standard definition. There are currently 4 communist countries including Laos. Now in Laos, c. 90% of the people are self employed, making a living with small farming, taxis, sidewalk sales, etc. And yet Laos is a Marxist/communist country? It makes more sense to call Laos an almost true capitalist country, although the government would step in the instant anyone actually got some real money.
Arguing about definitions seems a little pointless at some point. The best determining factor would seem to be what percent of GDP does the various governments control.

Fair enough, but this rave-whoring blog is based squarely on the wildly false premise that America under Obama is "Marxist". Semantics are one thing. Unfounded rhetoric so blatant as to be stupid us another.

Obama is much more a terrorist than G.W. Bush.... hmmmm. very intersting. I guess the fact that Obama voted against almost anything that GWB signed for national security, makes GWB a pacifist and Obama a Hawk? Wow! How can history be re-written in only a few years?

yet obummer takes credit for getting bin laden. You just said it yourself it was Bush that built the gun and kept us safe for the past decade as we took it to the Taliban on their home turf. Iran will have nuclear weapons soon and we can thank that pond scum in the white house!!!

If you think "this" is bad just wait until everyone realizes what barak is really up to. There is only one more chance people to attempt to right the ship.

History is depending on us to right this ship, we must wake up people.

Evidence is in the occupy America group. They are being destructive toward big and little businesses. Read their plaques.

Impeach Obama and it will end.

On what grounds should we impeach him?

Obamacare is unconstitutional as is the National Defense Authorization Act.

On what grounds? I am neither agreeing or disagreeing with you. It is important that you state a complete thought. You are making a lofty claim and you must back it up.

This sort of thing is common. I think you have a deeper problem here: you dislike being lied to, and dislike corrupt governments. As far as I see it as long as there is government there will be someone to abuse it and manipulate it. Even in the days since Abraham Lincoln the US has struggled with Presidents saying one thing and doing another. The president in fact doesn't have as much power as most people think he does. He is just a figure head.

Another fine peice of propaganda.

Hear ya.... what has he done that's an impeachable offense?

I saw I believe it was on Hannity the response to Bush being introduced in front of the troops (thunderous shouts) and Obama in Afghanistan walking to speak to the troops (sound: crickets, troops don't budge) and embarrassed golf claps only from his Secretary of Defense.

You live in a fairy tale world. Wake up.

Obama’s Stimulus Failed To Keep Unemployment Below 8 Percent As Obama Promised
Obama’s $825 Billion Stimulus Failed To Keep The Unemployment Rate Below The 8 Percent And Is Nowhere Close To The 6 Percent They Predicted It Would Be At By Now. (Bureau Of Labor Statistics, Accessed 1/6/12; Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein, “The Job Impact Of The American Recovery And Reinvestment Plan,”1/9/09; Congressional Budget Office, 5/25/11)


Read more: http://www.gop.com/index.php/...

Get rid of Obama today!

And I'll even give the demos a better guy!
The BETTER DEMOCRATIC CHOICE IS:

It's Vermin Supreme! Yes Democrats, now you have more than one reasonable choice.

First there was Keith Russell Judd and now the Great Vermin Supreme!

From now on let's root for him to get the Dem. nomination!

http://verminsupreme.com/

Because either is a better choice than Obama

NOBAMA2012!

Obama could make a viable case for the economy having improved by his actions he would be doing so. As he has often demonstrated, taking credit is not difficult for him. The government cannot improve the economy. It can only worsen it by its involvement or not worsen it by its involvement. To those still laboring under the delusion that FDR's similar Keynesian policies got us out of the Great Depression are you saying that we will again have to wait eleven years for it work? At least be honest to that extent.

The telling facts about who will decide this election.

An astounding 54 percent of Independents would NEVER vote for Obama. That compares to just 37 percent for Romney. Also, more Independents (37 percent to 30 percent) would "definitely" vote for Romney.

This is all great news for Romney and bad news for Obama. As has been the trend, Independents trust him more on the issues they think are the most important in this election.

Read more: http://articles.businessinsid...

Obama constantly talks about the jobs he has "saved" unemployment is higher---even by the government's distorted definition, we are better off than when Obama took office. No!

Epic fail for Obama!

The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama's three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.

Ok, so he's the biggest failure in history. And no matter how the liberals try to spin it, he's an epic failure.