Why do I get the feeling (opinions on Obama)

[Dphins4me]

Yes the banks had a choice.  Folks can also choose to turn down food stamps if they don't like the restriction they have.

But the bottom line is that the US government buying banks is a hell of a lot closer to communism than giving out food stamps is. 

And this bail out of the banks cost more too.

I'm not going to argue that I like what the Gov is doing.  Frankly I not sure this is not a plan to gain more & more control.

The Gov has gotten way to large.

[Spider-Dan]

Ultimately, it is the socialistic anti-American policies of the Democrat party that have caused our great nation to face these troubled times.

For example: take the SOCIALIST practice of providing a free education to every child.  Consider that if the government was not REDISTRIBUTING WEALTH (i.e. socialism) by giving an education to all the children of the poor, then maybe we would not have to look to poverty-stricken unskilled immigrants for our menial labor jobs; we could have an indefinitely renewable source of poverty-stricken unskilled laborers that are born in the U.S.A. to meet this need!  Two problems solved in one fell swoop.

Consider also that if the SOCIALIST Democrats could be thwarted, the government would not have to SHARE THE WEALTH by immorally stealing money from private citizens to build SOCIALIST roads and highways.  This is clearly another area that should be handled by the private sector; a company like Ford or GM should be paying to build roads, not the American citizen.  And this would also help to stimulate the American economy; if you want to drive on the Chevy Interstate-10, then you damn well better not be driving a Toyota or a Honda, or you can take yourself to Japan and try driving on the highways there.

Un-American socialist policies like these must not be allowed to continue.  Vote on November 4.

[CF DolFan]

Social Security, Medicare, and even public school lunch programs redistribute wealth. Should we get rid of these socialist schemes as well or do you draw a line between good socialism and bad socialism?

This is not extreme by any means. It's the Republican party.  Privatizing retirement as well as insurance for the elderly. Once they took God out of schools they wanted school vouchers so that they could go to the school of their choice.

For a college educated government worker I've very surprised you missed this?  OK government worker might explain it!     Obviously I joke as I also work for the government.

Ultimately, it is the socialistic anti-American policies of the Democrat party that have caused our great nation to face these troubled times.

For example: take the SOCIALIST practice of providing a free education to every child.  Consider that if the government was not REDISTRIBUTING WEALTH (i.e. socialism) by giving an education to all the children of the poor, then maybe we would not have to look to poverty-stricken unskilled immigrants for our menial labor jobs; we could have an indefinitely renewable source of poverty-stricken unskilled laborers that are born in the U.S.A. to meet this need!  Two problems solved in one fell swoop.

Consider also that if the SOCIALIST Democrats could be thwarted, the government would not have to SHARE THE WEALTH by immorally stealing money from private citizens to build SOCIALIST roads and highways.  This is clearly another area that should be handled by the private sector; a company like Ford or GM should be paying to build roads, not the American citizen.  And this would also help to stimulate the American economy; if you want to drive on the Chevy Interstate-10, then you damn well better not be driving a Toyota or a Honda, or you can take yourself to Japan and try driving on the highways there.

Un-American socialist policies like these must not be allowed to continue.  Vote on November 4.

Roads and bridges are part of the infrastructure of our country. That is what government is for.  They aren't for directing our day to day lives and punishing us when we succeed in business.  Go back and study history.  Not one of our fore fathers had a vision for the government caring for us. 




There are more Mercedes and Caddies in the projects (government housing) than in the middle class neighborhoods.  There are more 40 and 50 thousand dollar trucks in trailer parks than in the middle class neighborhoods but they are on government assistance. 
This is what is extreme.

Taxing rich oil companies so that people who don't want to work can have something only increases prices on the middle class.  Right now the government makes more money off of one gallon of gas than the oil company but we want to raise their taxes because it looks good on paper. 

[Phishfan]

Ultimately, it is the socialistic anti-American policies of the Democrat party that have caused our great nation to face these troubled times.

For example: take the SOCIALIST practice of providing a free education to every child.  Consider that if the government was not REDISTRIBUTING WEALTH (i.e. socialism) by giving an education to all the children of the poor, then maybe we would not have to look to poverty-stricken unskilled immigrants for our menial labor jobs; we could have an indefinitely renewable source of poverty-stricken unskilled laborers that are born in the U.S.A. to meet this need!  Two problems solved in one fell swoop.

Consider also that if the SOCIALIST Democrats could be thwarted, the government would not have to SHARE THE WEALTH by immorally stealing money from private citizens to build SOCIALIST roads and highways.  This is clearly another area that should be handled by the private sector; a company like Ford or GM should be paying to build roads, not the American citizen.  And this would also help to stimulate the American economy; if you want to drive on the Chevy Interstate-10, then you damn well better not be driving a Toyota or a Honda, or you can take yourself to Japan and try driving on the highways there.

Un-American socialist policies like these must not be allowed to continue.  Vote on November 4.

I hope this entire post was full of bullshit. Otherwise, I am scared.

[Defense54]

I hope this entire post was full of bullshit. Otherwise, I am scared.

I admit.......I was like , Holy shit! after reading that myself. 

[CF DolFan]

You guys are joking.  Please tell me you are joking Phish!! Or possibly drunk? 

[Phishfan]

Not joking at all, although I hope Spider is. Calling the building of roads with tax money socialism is pretty extreme. Saying by not educating poor children we can solve the problem of immigrant labor is way out there.

I haven't paid enough attention to remember where his political beliefs lie.

[fyo]

Some people here need a serious SARCASM DETECTOR!

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Some people here need a serious SARCASM DETECTOR!

No kidding, no way anybody would call the highways socialism.  Eisenhower was a republican.  And the republicans fight the evil socialist democrats. 

[pintofguinness14]

This is not extreme by any means. It's the Republican party.  Privatizing retirement as well as insurance for the elderly. Once they took God out of schools they wanted school vouchers so that they could go to the school of their choice.

For a college educated government worker I've very surprised you missed this?  OK government worker might explain it!     Obviously I joke as I also work for the government.

  I'm for getting the Gov out of schools, Social Security is a bad investment & IMO if the Gov would stop bumping uglies with the Pharm industry then medical cost would be lower & more affordable.

If we are a free capitalist country then practice what we preach.  Come to America & make your own way.  If you need help, then there are charities out there that will help you.  

Favoring "getting the gov out of schools" would be considered extreme by most. Vouchers, by the way, are not the same as no government hand. It still represents a redistribution of wealth unless you want everyone to pay for their own private education.

[Defense54]

Some people here need a serious SARCASM DETECTOR!

I believe thats why he started his post out with.........

I hope this entire post was full of bullshit. Otherwise, I am scared.

He didn't take it 100% seriously and either did I, its kind of hard to judge sarcasim through words on a screen..........

[Spider-Dan]

Roads and bridges are part of the infrastructure of our country. That is what government is for.

Says who?  It is taking money out of my pocket and using it for others.  Why do I need to spend money to build Interstate highways in Wyoming that I won't use?  That, my friends, is what we call "spreading the wealth," and you know what that means?  SOCIALISM.

There are more Mercedes and Caddies in the projects (government housing) than in the middle class neighborhoods.  There are more 40 and 50 thousand dollar trucks in trailer parks than in the middle class neighborhoods but they are on government assistance.

This is, of course, a verified statistical fact, not just some imaginary unsupported urban legend.  And it most certainly does not rely upon things like comparing the number of 1992 Cadillac Sevilles in the projects to number of 2007 Toyota Camrys in middle class neighborhoods, because that would be absurd.

Taxing rich oil companies so that people who don't want to work can have something only increases prices on the middle class.

This much is obvious to any sane citizen, because the enormous tax breaks given to oil companies during this administration have resulted in dramatic reductions in price at the pump.

[Dphins4me]

Favoring "getting the gov out of schools" would be considered extreme by most. Vouchers, by the way, are not the same as no government hand. It still represents a redistribution of wealth unless you want everyone to pay for their own private education.

I do not want the Gov providing the education.   Wanting Gov out of education has nothing to do with redistribution of wealth & more towards allowing people to choose what they want their kids to know.  At some point parents need to be parents.  Its not the Gov job to raise kids, however that is excatly what they are doing these days.

Politics is being played.   It like where my kids go.  They start teaching Spanish before the kids have learned English.

I'm fine with the Gov helping kids get their education, but providing it?  No.

[Dave Gray]

They start teaching Spanish before the kids have learned English.

This seems perfectly logical to me.  For starters, you never really stop learning English.  And, the younger you are, the easier you pick up language.  And I believe that learning both side by side helps you learn both better...is that not the case?

[pintofguinness14]

I do not want the Gov providing the education.   Wanting Gov out of education has nothing to do with redistribution of wealth & more towards allowing people to choose what they want their kids to know.  At some point parents need to be parents.  Its not the Gov job to raise kids, however that is excatly what they are doing these days.

Politics is being played.   It like where my kids go.  They start teaching Spanish before the kids have learned English.

I'm fine with the Gov helping kids get their education, but providing it?  No.

Should your kids be eligible for vouchers for private schools if the value of your annual tax payments is less than the value of the vouchers?