English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Are they trying to misrepresent it in order to incite hate and rhetoric?

2007-05-16 05:00:33 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

31 answers

They have a lack of education that's why. They get their information from Fox or Limbaugh or from their preacher. It's sad really. They think Socialism is the same as Communism. And, they think Capitalism is a democracy, when in fact it is more of an economic system that can get in the way of democracy. They are naive enough to believe that Hillary is a Socialist, when in fact she is nothing but another corporate Capitalist who sits on the board of WalMart and had her last elections funded by Rupert Murdoch the owner of Fox news. It's amazing what a little information will do to open one's mind to the real system that we live in and the fact that we are losing our democracy to Corporate interests and control in our government. And, it is happening on both sides of the aisle. We're all becoming corporate slaves as the result. We are being run by corporations for the sake of corporations and not the individual. What we are getting is a system where our tax money pays the corporations in the form of government funded subsidies in the amount of $250 billion a year. Much of it goes to the oil corporations who are already making record profits from their skyrocketing gas prices. I wonder if cons really like paying for their gas 3 times, once at the pump and two more times through taxes. It's called corporate welfare or corporate communism folks.
BTW, Europe is Socialist and I've been there enough to know that they are not miserable as a people.

2007-05-16 05:17:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

How is this Equal Rights???????
How is this NOT socialism?
"We must stop thinking of the individual and start thinking about what is best for society." Hillary Clinton

Barack Hussein Obama is now telling us that when he becomes president he is going to raise taxes on the rich ... but only the richest one percent.Seize wealth from the envied and either give it to or spend it on the envious! Not only does he tell us that he is going to take more money from the rich, but he's going to do it because "they don't need it!' That's right! Obama actually said that it is OK to raise taxes --- er .... excuse me, I meant to say "roll back" the tax cuts for the rich --- because this is money the rich don't need!
Says Who??????
Well, Hillary agrees!!
"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," Sen. Clinton said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Who are they quoting??
It is thus necessary that the individual should come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole ... that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual. .... This state of mind, which subordinates the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really the first premise for every truly human culture .... we understand only the individual's capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow man." Adolph Hitler

"Politicians never accuse you of 'greed' for wanting other people's money --- only for wanting to keep your own money." Joseph Sobran
And no, I'm not rich..

2007-05-16 12:24:36 · answer #2 · answered by bereal1 6 · 0 0

Where is the document that says equal rights means equal pay or equal property or equal housing. Isn't in the bill of rights! Equal rights also means everyone has the equal right to work hard to become successful or rich if thats what they want.

Equal rights doesn't mean a life support system for those that have less. We have plenty of social safety nets and they are used greatly. One of the reasons for our debt.

Socialism isn't equal either. The top 5% of the people running the socialist state will have much more than the rest of the komrads. My guess is if you lived under this system you'd see that , no matter what your job was, you'd never be ahead of your neighbor who did nothing.

If you live in the US, you are already more than equal to many other people in the world. If that makes you feel guilty, then give away all YOU have and none of what I have. Then you can feel better or superior to me.

2007-05-16 12:15:31 · answer #3 · answered by Ret. Sgt. 7 · 3 1

In the Us we have equal rights. This is 2007 not 1866. You must come from the pro-gay marriage crowd. Gay marriage provides nothing other than a warm and fuzzy for a very small percentage while providing no benefit for the greater society. Until very recently everyone understood what the word marriage defined. This wasn't an issue as 5,000 years of tradition were sufficient to make any changes a mote point. Try this one out. I want to marry my daughter, she is over 21, we will both be sterilized to prevent any problems of genetics. Just who would you be to tell me no, we love each other, it's none of your business, let's be fair, and stop interfering in my life, only bigots who hate would work to deny me this. Of all the idiocy I have seen, you are over the top. Socialism means no guarantee of equal rights, socialism means you only enjoy the rights the government allows you to have

2007-05-16 12:10:39 · answer #4 · answered by espreses@sbcglobal.net 6 · 3 1

As a conservative let me give you an idea of what I define as equal rights.

Equal rights are being treated equal regardless of race, religion, sex, ETC.

Equal rights are not being treated special because you're a minority (affirmative action). You Dems tried that before (slavery) and it didn't work out too well.

If you want to be treated equal, fine we'll treat everyone equal. But it should be equal at all times, not equal when it suits you and special when it doesn't.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it guarantee happiness. It guarantees the PURSUIT of happiness. Some people have taken this to believe that we should pay for people to not work.

You see, we all have the same opportunities. It's up to you to get off your butt and go PURSUE them. I come from a poor, working class family. My mother raised me and my two brothers on her own with nothing more than a GED and a heart of gold. She taught us that no one owes us anything, that if we want something we'd better go out and get it.

Today I make over $100,000, I have a Bachelors Degree in Psychology and I am working on my Masters.

I did it all on my own.

Was it hard? Yes. But the opportunities are there.

To liberals, equal rights means taking from people the things that they got up and worked for and giving them to people who refuse to do the same. This is known as redistribution of wealth.

Or, as the rest of the world calls it, Socialism.

As an expert in the realm of psychology I can tell you that by enabling people to do nothing, you foster the inability to act. People become dependant on the government and lose the will or ability to act for themselves. So, while on one hand they are cursing the government for "keeping them down" the other hand is stuck out waiting for their hand out.

Liberation is the ability to seek our own ends and the determination to not quit until we have reached our goals.

Socialism is taking from those who work hard for their possessions and giving them to those who refuse to work.

Hope this helped.

2007-05-16 12:12:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Equal rights for what? We understand that socialism can be defined as:

1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles

So if equal rights in your eyes means taking money from people that have it and giving it to the state, that is redistribution of wealth and therefore a socialist idea.

2007-05-16 12:12:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

huh?

there is a difference between equal rights and socialism. Socialism is a great evil in the world, and an economic policy. Equal rights are a legal issue, and outside the scope of economics.

Just remember socialists though....."All Animals are Equal....but some are more Equal than Others"
-Orwell, Animal Farm

2007-05-16 12:06:11 · answer #7 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 4 1

Facts don't matter to conservatives.

Tax increases are always bad.
War is always good when it's for security.
Big government must equal an Orwellian 1984.
Religion is good, teaches restraint, discipline.

Even though facts and figures show that some tax increases do immense good for society as a whole;
Even though facts and figures show that our current war is increasing terrorism roles and making us less safe;
Even though big government can be noble and just in its means;
Even though every fact in every textbook shows that more blood has been spilled in the name of a religion than any other cause in history;
These are the tenants of conservatism, and conservative is right, and no one can say otherwise. Period. The End.

2007-05-16 12:09:20 · answer #8 · answered by Lars 2 · 2 2

Equal rights are cool.

Socialism in some parts of society is acceptable.

Constantly battling against Supply & Demand is a waste of time.

2007-05-16 12:22:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think there is a certain amount of confusion
bought on by people's gut reaction to the word
"communism".

Remember, we spent the last 60 years reviling
anything to do with communism and therefore
socialism.

Both Communism and Socialism are very
important (though not, as it turns out, workable)
systems of government and economics.

What does this have to do with "equal rights"?

Well, one tenent of socialism is the equality
of the masses.

Of course, one tenent of democracy is ... the
equality of the masses.

I think the people who confuse these things are
simply reacting with their gut and don't really
even know what the words mean. If I don't like
it, it must be commie.

2007-05-16 12:06:36 · answer #10 · answered by Elana 7 · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers