Submit News News

Sunstein: Americans too racist for socialism

- "Defends communism, welfare state but says 'white majority' oppose programs aiding blacks, Hispanics" Yeah, uh huh... And this guy is advising who, where and when?

Like it, rave it and lets talk about it.... Read full article »
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Related Discussions
Top Comment
  • +19 raves Ssgtwaldo October 08, 2009 20:27:02 (edited)
    Ssgtwaldo
    He is the twerp that wants animals to have human rights and to be able to sue man...

    One nut advising another.....
    View thread
Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Comments
  • +2 raves
    jimiwhitten October 17, 2009 17:12:44
    jimiwhitten
    No, Americans are too intelligent and independent for socialism.
  • +2 raves
    MrNightmare October 14, 2009 20:19:48
    MrNightmare
    Sunstein is a Marxist, just as his boss the "Messiah" is, though Sunstein has come out of the closet!!! Obama is a Mzrxist and so are at least half his Czars.... Lenin stated more than once the following: Taking over a country's heath care system is the KEYSTONE in the arch of Socialism. Obama knows this and it is why he is pushing so hard for the single payer system..... Friends...if we do not get it together and fight this monstrosity, we will awake one day and the name of this country will have changed...USSA..The United Socialist States of America....we can not let this happen!!!
  • +1 raves
    Ronbo October 13, 2009 12:58:16
    Ronbo
    All nations on this planet were forged in blood.

    My question is when does this blood bath start?
  • +1 raves
    Winstonthethird October 13, 2009 09:04:19
    Winstonthethird
    Call me whatever the hell you need to, just keep it away from me and mine.
  • +4 raves
    Mike October 12, 2009 16:01:54 (edited)
    Mike
    Fruit Cake!

    Where does obama come up with all these communist freaks? and nobody seems to care!
  • +7 raves
    Alleycat October 12, 2009 01:25:46
    Alleycat
    I never thought I would see the day that we would have active communist in the highest levely of our government...
  • +5 raves
    The Fro... Alleycat October 12, 2009 01:29:02
    The Frog Prince
    Me neither AC. I was a Cold Warrior and thought we had put that away.
  • +3 raves
    Semper Fi The Fro... October 12, 2009 01:32:01 (edited)
    Semper Fi

    Cold Warrior
  • +4 raves
    Alleycat The Fro... October 12, 2009 10:42:46
    Alleycat
    I too was a cold warrior...

    Communism is a disease to capitalism which has been the source of this country's prosperity for centurys... The perpetuators of communism are power hungry piriahs that see opportunity in the fools among us. A disgusting lot...
  • +2 raves
    DoW October 11, 2009 21:20:37
    DoW
    Well I think that communism/socialism and the "original" american dream are contradictory in that there is a "dark side" to the american dream: you can climb the social ladder, and you can wallow in the shit underneath... for me, "softening" american economy and industry is nothing like communism, its fighting against a wealth gap between rich, qualified workers and poor families that has appeared in america. Communism in its "ideological" (and thus impossible) form is the greatest mode for social fluidity, and socialism aspires to it as well... they and the american dream have the same goal, so it is right to choose whichever one works best. In this current economic situation, I think that a slight "socialising" of america can only be for the best.
  • +2 raves
    Winston... DoW October 13, 2009 09:05:57
    Winstonthethird
    The only way to close that gap is to bring those on the bottom up, socialism works the other way around and brings the top down.
    (will the gap close? surely)
    (will anyone want the results? only if you're an abject failure as a human)
  • DoW Winston... October 18, 2009 16:08:15
    DoW
    Socialism closes the gap, by "taking money from the rich and giving it to the goverment"...then depends on how the govt uses money, but in country like america it should be ok. Capitalism in its full force is a jungle, and the ones below have no way of survivng, fighting for their rights, cos they have no money...thus the gap widens. Not saying we should all go communist, saying balance is important, is all
  • ol_cran... DoW November 15, 2009 10:17:32
    ol_crank_arm
    You're wrong. The productive capacity of ANY society is simply insufficient to provide the wants of ALL its members and the BEST manner of distributing those products is through a Free Market.

    Capitalism really has NO 'dark side'. It's a social system built on the fundamental tenet of PRIVATE OWNERSHIP of one's possessions and INDIVIDUAL DETERMINATION of what to do with those possessions.

    Collectivism (Communism, Socialism, etc.) is the OPPOSITE. So, to say that a 'slight socializing' of 'america' can be, in any way, good, is to COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTAND the distinction between the two.
  • DoW ol_cran... November 15, 2009 23:07:12 (edited)
    DoW
    Saying "you're wrong" to anyone is, in my opinion, ridiculous, especially with what youv written afterwards. "the productive capacity of any society is insufficscient"???bullshit! If the 10 richest people of america lived on a reasonable salary, say 50000$/month (which is already huge) and gave the rest, monthly, to a well-organized company made for feeding, housing and giving jobs to the homeless and poor, the US would not have many homeless left. say it takes 5000$ to house a homeless and find him a job (creating one if needed), which is already a lot, it would take 90 billion dollars for 6% of american people (around the homeless percentage in US), so if you take large amounts (proportionnally) of money to the 300 biggest fortunes in america, you would have no more homeless and around 75 million extra labour force (taking from homeless people some who would very probably settle down with some1 else and not work), and still have a lots of those rich people you seem to crave. What's more, this 90 billion of cost will pay back as all of those homeless are technically working "for you", state or company doing this.Some people with less talents, possibilities or simple dumb luck will lose all chance of going anywhere in a capitalist world where you have to pay ridiculous amounts...
    Saying "you're wrong" to anyone is, in my opinion, ridiculous, especially with what youv written afterwards. "the productive capacity of any society is insufficscient"???bullshit! If the 10 richest people of america lived on a reasonable salary, say 50000$/month (which is already huge) and gave the rest, monthly, to a well-organized company made for feeding, housing and giving jobs to the homeless and poor, the US would not have many homeless left. say it takes 5000$ to house a homeless and find him a job (creating one if needed), which is already a lot, it would take 90 billion dollars for 6% of american people (around the homeless percentage in US), so if you take large amounts (proportionnally) of money to the 300 biggest fortunes in america, you would have no more homeless and around 75 million extra labour force (taking from homeless people some who would very probably settle down with some1 else and not work), and still have a lots of those rich people you seem to crave. What's more, this 90 billion of cost will pay back as all of those homeless are technically working "for you", state or company doing this.Some people with less talents, possibilities or simple dumb luck will lose all chance of going anywhere in a capitalist world where you have to pay ridiculous amounts of money for education or medical care. I am not saying we become communist, but that the harsher capitalist system is not valid today (in my opinion) because it would be a jungle: there would be great men born from nothing to become everything, and also a good fourth of the population in near poverty (not taking into account the homeless and unemployed), which is unacceptable in a country like America.
    (more)
  • ol_cran... DoW November 15, 2009 23:31:39
    ol_crank_arm
    Hey Marxie ... education and medicine are expensive BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT IMPOSITION AND THE BARRISTOCRATIC VULTURES, to say nothing of the BANKSTER LEECHES whose eternal paper credit-money inflation makes EVERYTHING more expensive!

    While the period of genuine Capitalism flourished, there was NO CONCEPT of 'unemployment' and the ONLY poor people were recent imigrants from destitute places like Ireland and China.

    Don't give me your revisionist history Marxie propaganda!

    A Capitalist Free Market is THE MOST JUST AND EFFICIENT STSTEM for distribution of society's produce .... bar NONE!
  • DoW ol_cran... 6 days ago
    DoW
    The period of what you call "genuine capitalism" had no unemployment, but not thanks to capitalism, it was the industialization period that needed more workers than there were in the country, so of course it flourished. If you read a bit about the lifestyle of the workers during that period, you will realize they were POOR...unless you call rich having enough money to feed yourself irregularly, have a room somewhere where you sleep in the cold, stench and humidity, untill you die at 30 from working in unhealthy environment.
    I am not marxist, and you have a serious problem. Anyone who suggests a slight social wellfare system if communist to you? your worse than a fascist, your an "average american"! seriously, talk ab out enforcing stereotypes...
    revisionist marxist propaganda history? first of all, knowing your history might help you see that im stating obvious things, not rethinking history. Second, if you even fucking knew what marxism was you wouldnt be "insulting" me by calling me a marxist. Besides, Marx is one of the (and very possible THE) greatest political philosophers in the history of mankind. learn a bit more about what you constantly denigrate.
    Mixing a philosophical ideology and a way of governing is prettty much the stupidest thing you can do at this point...
  • ol_cran... DoW 6 days ago
    ol_crank_arm
    Ah ... genius ... Capitalism has NOTHING to do with Industrialization.

    Capitalism is a social structure based in ABSOLUTE PRIVATE OWNERSHIP in one's possessions and their attendant properties.

    During America's industrialization phase we had a lot of 'poor', because of the flood of imigrants (who had been starving to death in their home countries) drawn to our Capitalist social structure and vast tracts of undeveloped land that they could prospectively hold undiluted title in.

    It was during that period too, that Adam Smith's 'Real Bills' method of self-liquidating debt finance began to flourish, which gave us the phrase 'Miracle of Compound Interest', because one could save 15% of their working life's wages at a 5% interest and retire with a greater passive income than at their point of retirement!

    My 'philosophical ideology' is MINIMAL GOVERNANCE yielding the MAXIMAL PUBLIC LIBERTY. Which I rather believe is stupid of you to even ENTERTAIN rejection of.
  • DoW ol_cran... 6 days ago
    DoW
    Well we will just agree to disagree then, since I believe you are wrong, and you are not listening to what I say... Oh well, nice arguing with you :)
  • ol_cran... DoW 6 days ago (edited)
    ol_crank_arm
    No ... we do NOT merely 'disagree' ... you don't get away with equivocation in ANY argument with ME!

    Bastiat repeatedly and thoroughly illustrated the utter folly of socialistic placations by the French government in the 1800's and when von Mises put Marxist 'philosophy' to an exhaustive economic examination in 1922, he obliterated ALL pretense of its feasibility in the REAL world.

    You're WRONG! FLAT OUT ... WRONG! By trying to leave readers here with any shred of belief that collectivism is anything less than a path to societal destitution is IRRESPONSIBLE.
  • DoW ol_cran... 4 days ago
    DoW
    Wow...this is rather hilarious...
    Well, I'm in my last year of high school, in scientific section, so I do not have the tools to argue with you too far, so I will stop here. You (and the readers) belive what they want, If you want to be proven wrong, just go talk with someone who can satisfy you in a true argument. I look at results, and comparing France and America (not saying that France is better, or anything), several problems that America has, France doesnt because it is a capitalist country, but tinged (and some might argue a little too tinged) with socialism. Yes, I agree with you that this is running away...you have "won" this argument, without having convinced me or anything. Just for you to know, I am not communist, I just accept that there are flaws in a pure-blood capitalist system. So nice getting angry at you over not much, have a nice life, goodbye
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 44 Next » Last »
or
Cancel