DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Socialism - defined
Pages:  
Showing posts 51 - 75 of 152, (reverse)
AuthorThread
07/14/2010 11:28:31 PM · #51
Originally posted by Mick:

Originally posted by scalvert:

The 'paranoid idiots' comments was in reference to people who repeatedly regurgitate misinformation from blogs, shock jocks and sensationalist tabloid news that is so easily debunked as false if they cared to check.

Oh, so you were referring to liberals? Hmmm...


Who knew? The people and organizations mentioned here are liberals?

Limbaugh, Beck, Fox News and others exploit this psychological effect to enrich themselves off the delusions of the uninformed, and in the process destabilize what is supposed to be the UNITED States far more than any terrorist or failed bank.

Ray

07/15/2010 12:14:18 AM · #52
Originally posted by scalvert:

Limbaugh, Beck, Fox News and others exploit this psychological effect to enrich themselves off the delusions of the uninformed, and in the process destabilize what is supposed to be the UNITED States far more than any terrorist or failed bank.


If this is truly the case shouldn't the parties you mentioned above be jailed for "destabilizing" the UNITED States? Such destabilization must surely be against the law. Or could it be that the parties you identified are merely exercising the same right you practice in this very forum?

07/15/2010 12:15:51 AM · #53
Originally posted by Mick:

(...) A lot of greedy power-hungry politicians and bureaucrats think they own everything and can do whatever the hell they wish. (...)


You think they can't?
07/15/2010 01:09:45 AM · #54
Originally posted by FireBird:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Limbaugh, Beck, Fox News and others exploit this psychological effect to enrich themselves off the delusions of the uninformed, and in the process destabilize what is supposed to be the UNITED States far more than any terrorist or failed bank.


If this is truly the case shouldn't the parties you mentioned above be jailed for "destabilizing" the UNITED States? Such destabilization must surely be against the law. Or could it be that the parties you identified are merely exercising the same right you practice in this very forum?


Just because they have a right to do it, doesn't mean it's not destabilizing, or that we can't exercise OUR right to bemoan it. That's the process we have to work with, for better or for worse.

R.
07/15/2010 07:20:24 AM · #55
I think it's safe to say that most countries in the world have some kind of socialism woven into their fabric. Just the fact that we consider ourselves to be part of a "society" kind of entails that every one of us is touched in a positive manner by socialism.
07/15/2010 07:50:36 AM · #56
Originally posted by scalvert:

Limbaugh, Beck, Fox News and others exploit this psychological effect to enrich themselves off the delusions of the uninformed, and in the process destabilize what is supposed to be the UNITED States far more than any terrorist or failed bank.


the explosion of the internet age has had a great deal of effect on the world of politics, and some are using the fears of many, in conjunction with the information age, to further their party/agenda/wallet. bear in mind that both parties will level out using this to their advantage at some point. the big swing in any election is the "independent" block, and hopefully they are somewhat unswayed by the ravings of the lunatic fringe.

i'm not a particular fan of this administration, but i do know obama was handed a shit sandwich that he's been trying to transform and it ain't easy. it's not easier with this $$$$ congress that thinks having a majority means push through any spending, OR, conversely, the republicans who are trying to block all spending.

07/15/2010 07:57:37 AM · #57
Originally posted by FourPoint7:

i'm not a particular fan of this administration, but i do know obama was handed a shit sandwich that he's been trying to transform and it ain't easy. it's not easier with this $$$$ congress that thinks having a majority means push through any spending, OR, conversely, the republicans who are trying to block all spending.

Nice to see someone who isn't necessarily an Obama fan acknowledging this....even here we use the phrase "Polishing a turd" and to expect any similar miracle from a president simply isn't reasonable. I *am* an Obama fan, but I've gotten to the point where I simply don't much discuss it any more since all too often responses have a tendency to go right to ravings. I don't quite understand how it came to be that people will go into orbit at a moment's notice and blame the president for everything going wrong right down to the flat tire they had last week.
07/15/2010 08:21:41 AM · #58
I simply don't much discuss it any more since all too often responses have a tendency to go right to ravings. - NikonJeb

For the record, I'm a registered democrat that voted for O. But I've watched some things his administration has done with great disdain (spending).

Your quote above is exactly what's happened to me. I can't discuss politics any more with the right, as they just jump right into rantings that they are repeating from the talking heads points.

Personally, I've started reading the wall street journal online for my news, truly an unbiased news organization. They have an extensive opinion/editorial area, but "color" is confined to said area.
07/15/2010 02:48:06 PM · #59
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

I don't quite understand how it came to be that people will go into orbit at a moment's notice and blame the president for everything going wrong right down to the flat tire they had last week.


I don't recall this being your position when Bush was President - however I am old and likely confused. Actually, I think I hear the current president blame the past president for just about everything - even his flat tire...

Funny how the left all of a sudden wants "fairness". Truly funny. Comical how short some memories are and selective at that. Wait! - the selective thing - only happens to conservative white racist christian Fox watching Tea Party idiots. Reads as fair to me. Certainly only intellectuals could grasp what is really "good for the people".
And it is common knowledge that there are no conservative intellectuals with anything resembling a "good" idea.

too funny...

07/15/2010 03:13:59 PM · #60
I'm so sick of "intellectual" being used as a dirty word. Gee, I'm sorry that I want someone smart running the country. Too bad that sometimes they may act like they know better. Did you ever stop to consider that maybe they do? Am I being elitist? Maybe, but isn't that the American way? Isn't that what American exceptionalism is all about?
07/15/2010 03:54:50 PM · #61
Originally posted by Flash:

Actually, I think I hear the current president blame the past president for just about everything...

Then you are using your special skill, motivated reasoning. Try this for a laugh from about 1:19 (that's one minute, nineteen seconds. If you aren't impressed by that level of shamelessness, I think I smell a career in journalism over there in your future. Canadians look here.

Originally posted by Flash:

Wait! - the selective thing - only happens to conservative white racist christian Fox watching Tea Party idiots.

Yep.

Originally posted by Flash:

Certainly only intellectuals could grasp what is really "good for the people".

Absolutely.

Originally posted by Flash:

And it is common knowledge that there are no conservative intellectuals with anything resembling a "good" idea.

Right again. There aren't even any conservative "intellectuals".
07/15/2010 04:19:49 PM · #62
Originally posted by Flash:

Funny how the left all of a sudden wants "fairness".


I don't know what you mean by "fairness," but some substantive critiques would certainly be a welcome change. And by "substantive" I mean fact-based.

You can dislike Obama all you want, but I would hope that your dislike would be based on something other than the color of his skin.
07/15/2010 04:35:09 PM · #63
Originally posted by eqsite:

I'm so sick of "intellectual" being used as a dirty word.

In a representative democracy, voters naturally prefer to have politicians like themselves in power. So anyone prone to conspiracy theories and propaganda will view reality with skepticism and deride what would normally be a positive attribute. It's unavoidable. This is why Ahmadinejad scoffs at holocaust reports and 'socialism is evil' (but keep your government hands off my Medicare/Social Security)!
07/15/2010 04:39:27 PM · #64
I would like to hear from people who live in a socialist country. What is the basic standard of living? Is medical care readily available and of high quality? Any positive or negative comments about how it is working? Would they change to capitalism or something else if they could? Is it really sustainable?
07/15/2010 04:50:10 PM · #65
Originally posted by Louis:

Try this for a laugh


I don't get why Clinton is blamed. Clearly, it's George Washington's fault.
07/15/2010 07:21:04 PM · #66
Originally posted by chaimelle:

I would like to hear from people who live in a socialist country. What is the basic standard of living? Is medical care readily available and of high quality? Any positive or negative comments about how it is working? Would they change to capitalism or something else if they could? Is it really sustainable?


Hm - what qualifies as a socialist country? The US is the only major Western state without social healthcare, so by that standard every other major western country is socialist.

I can confirm in the UK that healthcare is freely and readily available. I have never worried about the cost of any healthcare service - the availability of medical help is almost taken as a basic human right. The private sector operates alongside the national healthcare service without problem. Social policies do not prevent bare naked capitalism from operating too.

My employer pays for private healthcare for me and my family - it can be faster, and it can be more comfortable if you need to stay overnight. I don't use it much - the NHS deals with many things as well or better than the private system. The last couple of time I have used private healthcare I got seen faster but the doctors bemoaned the fact that the private system has older equipment than the NHS (profits sometimes come before investment).

Because the public system is there, private healthcare is much cheaper. The NHS has been operating for over 50 years and changing it is political taboo: it is very popular.

All this and the standard of living is very much similar to the US.
07/15/2010 07:47:18 PM · #67
Matthew, I like that private health care is also available.

What qualifies as a socialist country? For the purpose of this forum I would say any country that defines itself that way, or anyone living where there are services provided by the government that wants to add a comment.
07/15/2010 08:26:10 PM · #68
Originally posted by chaimelle:

...anyone living where there are services provided by the government that wants to add a comment.

EVERY country has at least some services provided by the government.
07/15/2010 10:10:53 PM · #69
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

I don't quite understand how it came to be that people will go into orbit at a moment's notice and blame the president for everything going wrong right down to the flat tire they had last week.


Originally posted by Flash:

I don't recall this being your position when Bush was President - however I am old and likely confused.

Definitely. I have never been one of those people. Unless you can come up with anything whatsoever to support your "recollection", we'll leave you at old and confused.

I didn't much like the man, but it's simply ridiculous to blame a president for everything that's wrong.
07/16/2010 12:33:24 PM · #70
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:

Originally posted by Flash:

Funny how the left all of a sudden wants "fairness".


I don't know what you mean by "fairness," but some substantive critiques would certainly be a welcome change. And by "substantive" I mean fact-based.

You can dislike Obama all you want, but I would hope that your dislike would be based on something other than the color of his skin.


1. Charles Krauthammer and Brit Hume are 2 current examples of "fairness". Both in my view easily meet your criteria of "fact based" critics. If you have not listened or read either of these, I might suggest you do so, to allow yourself a more "fair" evaluation of Fox.

2. Regarding my dislike for the current president - it has to do with policy. Socialist policy to be precise. Left leaning policy. Liberal policy. But mostly his intellectual condecension (and yours/other liberals) that the only ones who know what is good for me is you. I think not.

3. For you to even mention race as a reason, signals your total mis-read on the groundswell happening under your feet. It is that mis-directed focus that drives even more into the "against" camp. People really do not like to be falsely accused. And when good folks are acuused of being racists by racists, it simply turns them off. An example - for the NAACP to accuse the Tea Party of racism is Hypocricy in its highest form. Obama would not have been elected without a large white vote (aka independents). The same group that are now being called racists. Pretty dumb.
07/16/2010 12:39:36 PM · #71
Originally posted by Flash:

Obama would not have been elected without a large white vote (aka independents). The same group that are now being called racists. Pretty dumb.

You're no independent.
07/16/2010 12:39:50 PM · #72
I wouldn't give Brit Hume the time of day or fifty cents for a cup of coffee.
07/16/2010 01:12:52 PM · #73
Originally posted by Louis:

I wouldn't give Brit Hume the time of day or fifty cents for a cup of coffee.

Oh, c'mon... the self-professed "committed conservative" who tried to convert Tiger Woods from Buddhism on air, persuaded Senator Frist to hold a 39 hour talkathon "to counter the Democratic filibuster against four of President Bush's most radically conservative judicial nominees," and thanked the ultra-conservative Media Research Center for providing much of Fox News' material? I mean, how neutral can you possibly get? :-/
07/16/2010 07:19:14 PM · #74
Originally posted by Flash:

Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:

Originally posted by Flash:

Funny how the left all of a sudden wants "fairness".


I don't know what you mean by "fairness," but some substantive critiques would certainly be a welcome change. And by "substantive" I mean fact-based.

You can dislike Obama all you want, but I would hope that your dislike would be based on something other than the color of his skin.


1. Charles Krauthammer and Brit Hume are 2 current examples of "fairness". Both in my view easily meet your criteria of "fact based" critics. If you have not listened or read either of these, I might suggest you do so, to allow yourself a more "fair" evaluation of Fox.

2. Regarding my dislike for the current president - it has to do with policy. Socialist policy to be precise. Left leaning policy. Liberal policy. But mostly his intellectual condecension (and yours/other liberals) that the only ones who know what is good for me is you. I think not.

3. For you to even mention race as a reason, signals your total mis-read on the groundswell happening under your feet. It is that mis-directed focus that drives even more into the "against" camp. People really do not like to be falsely accused. And when good folks are acuused of being racists by racists, it simply turns them off. An example - for the NAACP to accuse the Tea Party of racism is Hypocricy in its highest form. Obama would not have been elected without a large white vote (aka independents). The same group that are now being called racists. Pretty dumb.


Who's calling independents racists? If you're implying that the Tea Party is made up largely of independents, you're wrong. The last poll I saw indicated that upwards of 90 percent of self-identified Teabaggers were otherwise Republican/conservative, and between 75 and 80 percent voted for McCain/Palin.

And please, do tell why you think the NAACP a racist organization.

I don't recall ever saying that I know what's good for you. I DO know that conservative policies are completely bankrupt and bad for the country, having just lived through eight years with your guys in charge and now living with the consequences. And I DO know that you all don't have any new or different ideas than the ones that got us where we are today. If that's condescending, then so be it.
07/16/2010 09:46:48 PM · #75
Originally posted by Flash:

1. Charles Krauthammer and Brit Hume are 2 current examples of "fairness".


Charles Krauthammer is nothing more than a dressed-up Rush Limbaugh. His latest Washington Post column is a not-very-subtle repeat of the current popular right-wing meme of Obama as scary European-like socialist and a regurgitation of the tried-and-true meme of any Democrat as a reckless spendthrift. "Nationalizing" the student loan program?? Gimme a break! He's so intent on painting Obama as the Socialist Devil that he can't even recognize the plain human decency in trying to reduce the cost of a college education. There is nothing fair, or honest, in this particular Krauthammer column, and in my opinion this column is fairly typical of his treatment of his political opponents.

Message edited by author 2010-07-16 21:48:00.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 12/13/2019 03:31:00 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2019 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 12/13/2019 03:31:00 AM EST.