Miss Socialist Lite Snubbed by Obama

[Philip]

https://www.mediaite.com/online/barack- ... io-cortez/

Ocasio-Cortez is the new media darling of the left and some Democrats think she's the new rockstar of the party. So why would Obama ignore her? I think it's because he knows if the Democrats track toward socialism, they'll get killed in national elections and most local ones! One day the Democratic Party will wake up and realize that America is a center / right country, and that the further radically left they position themselves, the more they'll lose. Obama realizes there is a point of progressiveness that most Americans will never accept.

[PaulSacramento]

So, this is how thing typically work in most countries that have multiple parties:
40% are right, 40% are left and 20% are the "swing votes".
Roughly.

That is why you can go from a Majority left government for 8 years and then get a majority right ( or vice-versa).

See, you can't, typically, change the ideology of committed right and left wingers ( or conservatives and liberals if you prefer) and that is because they tend to have logical, reasonable arguments for their views.
The 20% or so that you can influence are the "emotional voters".
They can get swayed with arguments based on emotion or minor logic, even "change for the sake of change" works on some.
Now, if you want to alienate them for sure, what you have to do is go extreme to one side or another.
Too left wing and you lose them and too right wing and you lose them.
Insult them ( call them racist or bigots or ignorant, etc) and you lose them ( sound familiar?).

So, Obama knows this and knows that to when in the next election you MOST get back those votes that voted for trump and you do NOT do that by going extreme left OR by insulting them like most idiots in the liberal media are doing.

[Philip]

So, this is how thing typically work in most countries that have multiple parties: 40% are right, 40% are left and 20% are the "swing votes".Roughly.

And a lot of people tend to absorb their parents political views, as they grow to adulthood being around them. To a point, when really young, some go against their parents' politics, but later often come back to them. So, birth rates amongst parents with whatever political leanings become a big deal, over time.

[edwardmurphy]

One day the Democratic Party will wake up and realize that America is a center / right country, and that the further radically left they position themselves, the more they'll lose.

I'm not sure that that's true. I think that most Americans - and polls tend to bear this out - want a robust social safety net, better gun control, and affordable health care for the poor. I think it has more to do with messaging than ideology.

Look at Obamacare, as an example. Most Trump supporters loathe Obamacare. Many of these same people, however, support the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid expansion. Somehow many people are unaware that Obamacare, the ACA, and Medicaid expansion are three different names for precisely the same thing. Poll after poll has showed this to be true. Call it Obamacare and poor Republicans hate it and want it destroyed. Call it the ACA and they like it and want it protected.

Gun control is another clear example. In poll after poll the overwhelming majority want universal background checks, unless the issue is framed as "gun control," in which case it's an evil attack on the Second Amendment.

I think that American political dialogue has been pushed, dragged, and tricked to the right over the last couple of decades, but despite that we've become a more socially liberal, more tolerant nation, and we generally believe that healthcare is a right. Yet again, the polls bear that out. Gay marriage, the ACA, and limited gun control are all supported by the majority.

It's also worth remembering that Trump didn't win by much. He lost the popular vote by a wide margin - discredited conspiracy theories notwithstanding - and in the swing states that gave him the EC win his victory was by a razor thin margin. And since then the Republicans have been getting killed in elections across the board.

I think that the opposite of your point is true. I think that the right has pushed too hard, and been too intractable, and the Trump Administration has been too corrupt, divisive, and chaotic. I think that there's a real possibility that we'll see a Blue Wave in November, despite the fact that the map strongly favors the GOP.

[B. W.]

Here is what the bible says about Socialism in Proverbs 1:10-19. Verse 14 is revealing - don't go with this line of thinking:

Pro 1:10 My son, if sinners entice you, Do not consent.
Pro 1:11 If they say, "Come with us, Let us lie in wait for blood, Let us ambush the innocent without cause;
Pro 1:12 Let us swallow them alive like Sheol, Even whole, as those who go down to the pit;
Pro 1:13 We will find all kinds of precious wealth, We will fill our houses with spoil;
Pro 1:14 Throw in your lot with us, We shall all have one purse,"
Pro 1:15 My son, do not walk in the way with them. Keep your feet from their path,
Pro 1:16 For their feet run to evil And they hasten to shed blood.
Pro 1:17 Indeed, it is useless to spread the baited net In the sight of any bird;
Pro 1:18 But they lie in wait for their own blood; They ambush their own lives.
Pro 1:19 So are the ways of everyone who gains by violence; It takes away the life of its possessors.
NASB

First off those that speak about having one purse - income equality, redistribution of wealth, income justice interestingly share the same same traits mentioned in Verse 10-19.

They do lie in wait to draw blood and ambush the innocent without cause by either character assassination, threats of violence, name calling, slander. They also think it is a good thing to bring the social order into a state of chaos - drag all into a living hell - to get their way. Their way is to acquire power by finding all kinds of precious wealth to fill their houses with spoil by means of tossing it into one purse or collection system which they control all means of life.

We are told not walk with them and keep far away form such people because they they support and love depravity and like to shed the blood of the innocent (unborn and those whom oppose them). They spread before people baited nets to catch the unwary and brainwash them.

Socialism runs out of other peoples money and they end up ambushing their own lives because the gains of acquiring power and gain by unscrupulous means will take 'away the life of its possessors.'

I find that an interesting passage in the bible.

The hall of modern socialism is actually found in mega corporations who want to control all aspects of life so only a few elites control all the wealth while hiding behind great swelling words of emptiness inside a net baited with equality and social justice to acquire their power to rule all enforced by a compliant Government.
-
-
-

[PaulSacramento]

Never been a fan of socialism since, well, it has never worked very well.

I think it works when, as an example, 8 years of socialism is tempered with 8 years of conservatism ( or vice-versa).

[RickD]

Here is what the bible says about Socialism in Proverbs 1:10-19. Verse 14 is revealing - don't go with this line of thinking:

Pro 1:10 My son, if sinners entice you, Do not consent.
Pro 1:11 If they say, "Come with us, Let us lie in wait for blood, Let us ambush the innocent without cause;
Pro 1:12 Let us swallow them alive like Sheol, Even whole, as those who go down to the pit;
Pro 1:13 We will find all kinds of precious wealth, We will fill our houses with spoil;
Pro 1:14 Throw in your lot with us, We shall all have one purse,"
Pro 1:15 My son, do not walk in the way with them. Keep your feet from their path,
Pro 1:16 For their feet run to evil And they hasten to shed blood.
Pro 1:17 Indeed, it is useless to spread the baited net In the sight of any bird;
Pro 1:18 But they lie in wait for their own blood; They ambush their own lives.
Pro 1:19 So are the ways of everyone who gains by violence; It takes away the life of its possessors.
NASB

First off those that speak about having one purse - income equality, redistribution of wealth, income justice interestingly share the same same traits mentioned in Verse 10-19.

They do lie in wait to draw blood and ambush the innocent without cause by either character assassination, threats of violence, name calling, slander. They also think it is a good thing to bring the social order into a state of chaos - drag all into a living hell - to get their way. Their way is to acquire power by finding all kinds of precious wealth to fill their houses with spoil by means of tossing it into one purse or collection system which they control all means of life.

We are told not walk with them and keep far away form such people because they they support and love depravity and like to shed the blood of the innocent (unborn and those whom oppose them). They spread before people baited nets to catch the unwary and brainwash them.

Socialism runs out of other peoples money and they end up ambushing their own lives because the gains of acquiring power and gain by unscrupulous means will take 'away the life of its possessors.'

I find that an interesting passage in the bible.

The hall of modern socialism is actually found in mega corporations who want to control all aspects of life so only a few elites control all the wealth while hiding behind great swelling words of emptiness inside a net baited with equality and social justice to acquire their power to rule all enforced by a compliant Government.
-
-
-

[B. W.]

Here is what the bible says about Socialism in Proverbs 1:10-19. Verse 14 is revealing - don't go with this line of thinking:

Pro 1:10 My son, if sinners entice you, Do not consent.
Pro 1:11 If they say, "Come with us, Let us lie in wait for blood, Let us ambush the innocent without cause;
Pro 1:12 Let us swallow them alive like Sheol, Even whole, as those who go down to the pit;
Pro 1:13 We will find all kinds of precious wealth, We will fill our houses with spoil;
Pro 1:14 Throw in your lot with us, We shall all have one purse,"
Pro 1:15 My son, do not walk in the way with them. Keep your feet from their path,
Pro 1:16 For their feet run to evil And they hasten to shed blood.
Pro 1:17 Indeed, it is useless to spread the baited net In the sight of any bird;
Pro 1:18 But they lie in wait for their own blood; They ambush their own lives.
Pro 1:19 So are the ways of everyone who gains by violence; It takes away the life of its possessors.
NASB

First off those that speak about having one purse - income equality, redistribution of wealth, income justice interestingly share the same same traits mentioned in Verse 10-19.

They do lie in wait to draw blood and ambush the innocent without cause by either character assassination, threats of violence, name calling, slander. They also think it is a good thing to bring the social order into a state of chaos - drag all into a living hell - to get their way. Their way is to acquire power by finding all kinds of precious wealth to fill their houses with spoil by means of tossing it into one purse or collection system which they control all means of life.

We are told not walk with them and keep far away form such people because they they support and love depravity and like to shed the blood of the innocent (unborn and those whom oppose them). They spread before people baited nets to catch the unwary and brainwash them.

Socialism runs out of other peoples money and they end up ambushing their own lives because the gains of acquiring power and gain by unscrupulous means will take 'away the life of its possessors.'

I find that an interesting passage in the bible.

The hall of modern socialism is actually found in mega corporations who want to control all aspects of life so only a few elites control all the wealth while hiding behind great swelling words of emptiness inside a net baited with equality and social justice to acquire their power to rule all enforced by a compliant Government.

Share one purse - that is Socialism/Marxism ...

SO YES THIS IS SERIOUS

[edwardmurphy]

Guys, socialism has many definitions. As a descriptive term it's nearly as useless as liberal and conservative. What it means is entirely dependent on who's saying it.

Now, B.W. seems to believe that the "socialism" of of the Third Reich, the USSR, and modern Sweden are all basically the same thing, and that universal healthcare is the first step on a slippery slope that will inevitably cause the US to tumble down into a hellish dystopia. Furthermore, he seems to believe that all of us liberals desire such a dystopia, as if getting our way on a political point is worth the loss of our safety, freedom, and property.

The reality is that virtually nobody wants to kick all of our stuff into the same pot and put the government in charge of it all. Nobody.

The typical liberal pretty much wants to see the social tolerance of today matched with the tax rates, infrastructure investments, and prosperity of the Eisenhower Administration.

We're all capitalists, guys. We all believe in the free market. It's just that those of us on the liberal side believe that an unregulated market can never be free. Capitalism is all about taking everything for yourself, so without regulation we end up with entire sectors of the economy dominated by a handful of megacorporations, which will then collude to fix prices and kill competition.

We believe that historically low taxes for the rich are, in fact, the exact kind of wealth redistribution that conservatives accuse us of wanting, and that in order for our economy to flourish we need to bring the money back from the offshore accounts and put it in the hands of the people. Remember the Henry Ford story? One billionaire may have the purchasing power of a hundred thousand middle class families, but he's not going to use it. That one guy might buy a hundred luxury cars and twenty-five mansions, but that's nothing compared to the two hundred thousand mid-range cars and the hundred thousand three-bedroom houses that the hundred thousand middle class families will purchase. In order for us all to prosper the money needs to MOVE! the way to make it move is to put it back in the hands of the regular people. The billionaires aren't the job creators - we are!

In order for us to have more money to spend - thereby giving others more to spend, thus allowing them to fund the spending of still others - we need to make some changes. We need to free our kids from crippling student debt so that they can support themselves on entry-level jobs and take chances on working for start-ups or creating their own businesses. We need to raise wages for the working poor so that they can afford to live without government subsidies. The minimum wage hasn't come close to keeping up with inflation and cost of living increases. We need to close that gap. We need to penalize the pointless use of robots to do jobs that people can do just as well. Yes, in the short term that will hurt the wealthy a bit. In the short term the grocery store won't make as much money without a half-dozen robot cashiers. But in the long term it will make more because more people will have more to spend.

And we need universal healthcare so that the poor and self-employed aren't forced to skip out on necessary medical treatment, and people aren't stuck in jobs they don't want because they can't afford to be without their benefits. Losing a job or getting sick shouldn't be a catastrophe that costs a family everything.

And that, B.W., is the "socialism" that actual American liberals actually support - regulated free-market capitalism with equitable compensation for our labor and a robust social safety net to protect us if we run into trouble. It's tough to argue against any of that without seeming heartless and selfish, and that's why conservative pundits pretend that what we actually want is for the US to become Venezuela. It's easier to lie about our beliefs than it is to counter our arguments.

[B. W.]

Ed, we can actually agree on corrupt corporations wanting to corner the market. That is not free market at all.

We have the food industry selling modified food packed with harmful chemical like Sodium Nitrates the defoaming agent used in soft drink soda fountain machines that all restaurants serve. Toss in the pharmaceutical companies and the marketing of drugs to treat the issues such things as these cause and see how the system works.

Toss in the media and tech world as well too - most owners and CEO's of industry, tech, media, drug compromises, food industry, etc and so forth are liberal and seek monopoly of select groups to control. You complain about this all the times and brand all as conservatives - I do not Think Zuckerberg and Bill Gates are conservatives and neither is Soros and his foundations crowd which comprise most of the to 1 percent crowd.

Add to this the tendency to buy off and control members in any Government to improve their gain - is not free market - it is all about acquiring more power in the hands of the few supported by a compliant Government to enforce what appears to be taking shape - 'a company store' model utopia which cannot work.

Liberalism as we define it today is not the same as classical liberalism. Liberalism today is defined as progressives under the influence of Cultural Marxism/social conflict theory to bring order out of chaos by the sharing from one common purse distributed equally to all. Sounds so wonderful - but when you run out of other peoples money -what then?

Venezuela is a good example of socialism and what it produces... collapse. The problem is not system so much but rather that people do indeed have a sin nature and are incapable of producing eternal good for all. You cannot stamp out or reeducate selfishness, hubris, betrayal, rejection, slander, people not liking each other, nor stamp out all manner of wars and feuds.

Creating perfect society and culture is impossible. We human beings are indeed flawed and indeed have a bent to justify sin and iniquity.

I heard the arguments that socialist use - Hard Socialism is bad but soft social is good and works. Problem is this - soft socialism always morphs in time into hard socialism. Just an objective truth based on the clear historical evidence.
-
-
-

[Philip]

There are nuances of truth and stereotypes of those who generally identify with conservatism or liberalism.

I think most conservatives DO want to have a safety net for the poor, of healthcare and subsidized housing - for those who truly need it. But do they want everyone to get a certain slice of pie no matter what - whether they can work, have a job, are trying to have these, or not? Conservatives don't want the users and takers to milk the system or to have policies that create more generational dependencies. They don't want people thinking they've a right to income they didn't help create or work for - as if they are entitled to it. This means there has to be reasonable criteria for these things. There were things about Obamacare that weren't sustainable or good for businesses or hiring. It doesn't matter what we call it, there has to be strict criteria. Cradle to the grave free healthcare for all - it's unsustainable! But simple people make simple labels about whatever group without mentioning the specifics that these things turn on.

Look at Venezuela - Chavez and the socialists down there just kept getting elected by promising the poor all these things and subsidies that couldn't go on forever. It made people feel entitled and to look at the workers, owners and producers as all evil and the government as the savior of the people. And those guys were in cahoots with the cartels and mafia. And now look at that country. Things MUST be sustainable long term and not harmful. And the parties have to both start becoming as critical over their own politicians as they do the other side. It's not all black and white - the good guys vs. the bad guys, the poor vs. the evil business class - despite what most would like us to believe. It's far too easy to speak in terms of meaningless generalities and stereotyping because its far more effective with the low-information types or people who have already made up there minds that nuances don't matter. It doesn't matter the system, there will be winners and losers, as no one can get everything they want. But the politicians would have us believe that if we just get rid of this or that group of folks, everything will be good. LOL.

[RickD]

Here is what the bible says about Socialism in Proverbs 1:10-19. Verse 14 is revealing - don't go with this line of thinking:

Pro 1:10 My son, if sinners entice you, Do not consent.
Pro 1:11 If they say, "Come with us, Let us lie in wait for blood, Let us ambush the innocent without cause;
Pro 1:12 Let us swallow them alive like Sheol, Even whole, as those who go down to the pit;
Pro 1:13 We will find all kinds of precious wealth, We will fill our houses with spoil;
Pro 1:14 Throw in your lot with us, We shall all have one purse,"
Pro 1:15 My son, do not walk in the way with them. Keep your feet from their path,
Pro 1:16 For their feet run to evil And they hasten to shed blood.
Pro 1:17 Indeed, it is useless to spread the baited net In the sight of any bird;
Pro 1:18 But they lie in wait for their own blood; They ambush their own lives.
Pro 1:19 So are the ways of everyone who gains by violence; It takes away the life of its possessors.
NASB

First off those that speak about having one purse - income equality, redistribution of wealth, income justice interestingly share the same same traits mentioned in Verse 10-19.

They do lie in wait to draw blood and ambush the innocent without cause by either character assassination, threats of violence, name calling, slander. They also think it is a good thing to bring the social order into a state of chaos - drag all into a living hell - to get their way. Their way is to acquire power by finding all kinds of precious wealth to fill their houses with spoil by means of tossing it into one purse or collection system which they control all means of life.

We are told not walk with them and keep far away form such people because they they support and love depravity and like to shed the blood of the innocent (unborn and those whom oppose them). They spread before people baited nets to catch the unwary and brainwash them.

Socialism runs out of other peoples money and they end up ambushing their own lives because the gains of acquiring power and gain by unscrupulous means will take 'away the life of its possessors.'

I find that an interesting passage in the bible.

The hall of modern socialism is actually found in mega corporations who want to control all aspects of life so only a few elites control all the wealth while hiding behind great swelling words of emptiness inside a net baited with equality and social justice to acquire their power to rule all enforced by a compliant Government.

Share one purse - that is Socialism/Marxism ...

SO YES THIS IS SERIOUS

Let me make sure I understand you correctly. You are saying that Proverbs 1:14 was written as a warning against socialism in governments?

[RickD]

B.W.,

After rereading the passages in Proverbs that you posted, and focusing on Proverbs 1:14 that you underlined, I still don't see this verse pertaining to socialism, specifically, as I initially thought you meant. I'm still not sure if that's what you mean, but I will say that the verses could, if I were to go way out on a limb, generally refer to socialism, if only because socialism is theft.


I just don't see any way that verse 14 refers to socialism, as a government entity.

The verses are talking about immoral people, taking advantage of innocent people, stealing their hard earned wealth, and dividing the spoils among themselves.

I just don't see the jump to Government run socialism there.

I cannot stand the concept of socialism. It's immoral. Stealing money to give to others, is just plain immoral. Not to mention, it makes people lazy. It takes away the incentive to work. Capitalism is based on mutual benefit.

[edwardmurphy]

I cannot stand the concept of socialism. It's immoral. Stealing money to give to others, is just plain immoral. Not to mention, it makes people lazy. It takes away the incentive to work. Capitalism is based on mutual benefit.

You sound like Hannity. If you want to attack socialism then scrap the conservative pundit's definition and listen to what American proponents of socialism actually say they want. Right now you're just kicking a straw man. It may be an easy fight, but it's also a meaningless victory.

[RickD]

I cannot stand the concept of socialism. It's immoral. Stealing money to give to others, is just plain immoral. Not to mention, it makes people lazy. It takes away the incentive to work. Capitalism is based on mutual benefit.

You sound like Hannity. If you want to attack socialism then scrap the conservative pundit's definition and listen to what American proponents of socialism actually say they want. Right now you're just kicking a straw man. It may be an easy fight, but it's also a meaningless victory.

I don't watch nor listen to Hannity, so I have no idea what he says.

But since you want me to listen to what proponents of socialism actually say, I did a quick search of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Her socialist platform included Medicare for all, tuition-free public colleges, and “housing as a human right.”

All of which need funding. And how will they be funded? Stealing from the taxpayer. It's immoral. Housing as a human right? That's socialism speak for taxpayer funded housing for all.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews. ... e.amp.html