User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

RichClem » 29 Jul 2014 6:29 pm » wrote: Pinochet didn't seize power to follow free market policies. He prevented a would-be Communist dictator from establishing a Cuba-like dictatorship.

As even the Chilean Left has finally admitted.

Voters in Latin America often vote for Socialists, but every country is so badly dominated by the alliance of the liberal-left with Big Governmentand Big Business that ordinary citizens become so cynical, they don't participate in the democratic process.

However, Honduras is about to follow China's Free Enterprise Zones that brought not only prosperity, but millions of citizens who moved into them.

Success is sometimes emulated.

Most often not, which is why most of Latin America is poverty stricken.

Let's not sugar coat this - Allende was shot, killed dead, he did not step aside and those who shot him did just what I said - they took leadership by force - Pinochet got that spot because the elected leader was gunned down. What I said was 100% accurate. The people elected a socialist leader as they did again and again. The people are voting for what they want and your corporate masters say otherwise. Then the mercs are sent out to whip the bad cows back into line.
Image

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

RichClem » 29 Jul 2014 9:25 am » wrote:When did countries ever vote for the free market in Latin America, moonbat? :)
So they never chose it? You yourself said they never voted for it. In fact everytime they vote they tend to elect socailists. Folks like Pinochet (whose salad you toss regularly) only get power when the elected leaders are gunned down and shock troops force the population into submission.
Image

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

littlehawk12 » 19 Jul 2014 12:57 am » wrote: More airhead stupidity. You are dumber than a box of rocks.

And how does your husband feel about all that dick you suck for crack every nite? :rofl: :die: :rofl: :die:
Again with sexual activity used as an insult..and you **** wonder why the right is accused of waging war on women.
Image

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

shintao » 19 Jul 2014 12:41 am » wrote: well idiot it isn't free market *******, and neither is America dumb ****~~~ :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :sleep: :die: :die: :die: :die: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[
1]
[
2]
as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.[
3]
[
4]
"Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[
5]
There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[
6]
They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[
7]

A socialist economic system is based on the organisational precept of production for use, meaning the production of goods and services to directly satisfy economic demand and human needs where objects are valued based on their use-value or utility, as opposed to being structured upon the accumulation of capital and production for profit.[
8]
In the traditional conception of a socialist economy, coordination, accounting and valuation would be performed in kind (using physical quantities), by a common physical magnitude, or by a direct measure of labour-time in place of financial calculation.[
9]
[
10]
On distribution of output there have been two proposals, one which is based on the principle of to each according to his contribution and another on the principle of from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. The advisability, feasibility and exact methods of resource allocation and valuation are the subject of the socialist calculation debate.
The socialist political movement includes a diverse array of political philosophies. Core dichotomies within the socialist movement include the distinction between reformism and revolutionary socialism and between state socialism and libertarian socialism. State socialism calls for the nationalisation of the means of production as a strategy for implementing socialism, while libertarian socialists generally place their hopes in decentralized means of direct democracy such as libertarian municipalism, citizens' assemblies, trade unions, and workers' councils[
11]
coming from a general anti-authoritarian stance.[
12]
[
13]
[
14]
[
15]
[
16]
[
17]
[
18]
Democratic socialism highlights the central role of democratic processes and political systems and is usually contrasted with non-democratic political movements that advocate socialism.[
19]
Some socialists have adopted the causes of other social movements, such as environmentalism, feminism and liberalism.[
20]

Modern socialism originated from an 18th-century intellectual and working class political movement that criticised the effects of industrialisation and private property on society. The revival of republicanism in the American Revolution of 1776 and the egalitarian values introduced by the French Revolution of 1789 gave rise to socialism as a distinct political movement. In the early 19th century, "socialism" referred to any concern for the social problems of capitalism irrespective of the solutions to those problems. However, by the late 19th century, "socialism" had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for an alternative post-capitalist system based on some form of social ownership.[
21]
During this time, German philosopher Karl Marx and his collaborator Friedrich Engels published works criticizing the utopian aspects of contemporary socialist trends and applied a materialist understanding of socialism as a phase of development which will come about through social revolution instigated by escalating and conflicting class relationships within capitalism.[
22]
Alongside this there appeared other tendencies such as anarchism, revolutionary syndicalism, social-democracy, Marxism–Leninism and democratic socialism as well as the confluence of socialism with anti-imperialist and anti-racist struggles around the world. The socialist movement came to be the most influential worldwide movement and political-economic worldview of the 20th century.[
23]
Today, socialist parties and ideas remain a political force with varying degrees of power and influence in all continents leading national governments in many countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
That help you *******?

Excellent definition but since it does not suit their meme they will ignore it. You can't fix stupid.
Image

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

littlehawk12 » 18 Jul 2014 11:42 pm » wrote: LMAO! Thanks for proving my point! ******* Smelly ****! :rofl: :die: :rofl: :die:

So you are saying that Cannon is so powerful that the Heritage website bends itself to his will and changes to say what he wants?
How does you wife feel about that man crush you have on him?
Image

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

littlehawk12 » 18 Jul 2014 8:27 pm » wrote: So Cannonhomo lied and made the list out to mean what he wants it to mean, not what it actually means. Thanks for clarifying this. :D
Sorry, pathetic *******, but if you check the actual heritage site it does not say least socialist.
Image

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

RichClem » 18 Jul 2014 8:07 am » wrote: Ignoring the actual definition of Socialism; which is either government ownership or effective control by government of the private sector.

That's roughly the opposite of Heritage's ranking.

The psycho also ignores the significant if not massive changes in these countries. Canada, for example, slashed government spending by half relative to GDP and has stated its intent to reform their health care system by Free Market Principles.

Sweden faced economic collapse from the weight of its welfare state roughly 20 years ago and has moved strongly toward Free Market reform ever since.

To cite just two examples.

Are they totally reformed? No, of course not, but ranking high on Heritage's index puts them near the top of the freest, least Socialist countries on Earth.

The ranking is relative, moonbat.
Since when is "proper regulation" thousands of pages if not tens of thousands of pages that micro manage a corporation's behavior, as Obamacare and Dodd-Frank do?
That is not the list that Heritage put on their site. Their list is only the freeist - it does not mention "least Socialist" that one is all you.
And you keep mentioning this snipe "Free Market" can you provide a single example of an actual free market?
Also - just because these nations used what you call a "free market reform" does not change the fact that they still have socialized medicine, retirement and secondary education. Those are not the things that they culled from the budget to make it work.
You are bleating about the wrong thing,
Image

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

RichClem » Yesterday, 7:08 am » wrote: Can't you even tell believable lies? Clinton had countless affairs, about which I wrote nothing.

Not that the truth ever deters your endless bulls***, I'm obsessed with his felonies and impeachable acts.

The ones you've told literally years of lies denying.


While dishonestly smearing one of his rape victims.

You're truly one twisted, psychopathic individual.

I feel compelled to ask...WHY THE **** DOES IT MATTER WHAT SHE THINKS? Why chase her, dog her, and stalk her just because she doesn't agree with you?You sick, pathetic little twit.
Image

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

Your own source admitted that "at least three" liberal groups had problems, likely delays. So far, 500 conservative groups have complained, many of which were bullied, intimidated, made illegal demands of. Wake up, geez. Not a single one of those political wolves in social welfare sheeps clothing were denied though, were they? But one of the liberal groups was.

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

Bulls***. Liberal groups operate under the same guidelines, few if any of which were harassed. This has been the law, the standard for decades. Obama's IRS ignored that and attempted to interfere in a presidential election, at the explicit demands of Democrats as Obama looked on and did nothing. And Obama's rhetoric, promotion of one top IRS official, repeated vilification of not only Citizens United but conservative donors gave explicit guidelines to a will IRS. His IRS. Bulls***. It has now been revealed that top Obama officials knew, never mind that many, many public complaints had been made going back a couple years. It is Obama's Constitutional obligation either directly or through his officials to pay investigate and rectify it. As a Chicago thug, he knew it was happening and wanted it to. It wasn't IRS underlings. Don't kid yourself. It went right to Washington. The names of some have been cited. The delay for liberal groups, off the top of my head, was less than half of conservatives, and I haven't seen one single example of intimidation of any liberal groups. "The Internal Revenue Service, under pressure after admitting it targeted anti-tax Tea Party groups for scrutiny in recent years, also had its eye on at least three Democratic-leaning organizations seeking nonprofit status. One of those groups, Emerge America, saw its tax-exempt status denied, forcing it to disclose its donors and pay some taxes. None of the Republican groups have said their applications were rejected. Progress Texas, another of the organizations, faced the same lines of questioning as the Tea Party groups from the same IRS office that issued letters to the Republican-friendly applicants. A third group, Clean Elections Texas, which supports public funding of campaigns, also received IRS inquiries." http://www.washingto...liberal-groups/ This is what listing an example and citing a source looks like. Just saying they have been listed somewhere is useless ****.

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

It is not up to the IRS to determine beforehand if group is political or if it is not. They are supposed to assume requests are made in good faith. So de facto, the IRS was specifically picking out conservative groups and delaying, bulling and intimidating them. It was a violation of Americans' civil liberties. This is unquestionably an abuse of power and impeachable act. Obama wanted to use the IRS and other branches of government, as well as widespread cheating by the Democrat Party to steal the election. Oh so they are supposed to just accept things on good faith? Why do they have auditors? Why do they have investigators? Why even have rules? No they are not supposed to just accept anything on good faith, hence the application, hence the whole process. I know you cannot accept that he won, narrow margin and all, Obama won and so the election was stolen. Sorry you ran an ******* who lost. Try a better candidate next time. Try not excluding Hispanics and women through your rhetoric and legislation, they do vote.

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

If not, why not? This is unquestionably an abuse of power and impeachable act. No political action is not the same as community service. No they should not be allowed tax exempt status. And there is not one bit of evidence that anyone outside of the IRS knew about the filter being used to sort through the huge influx of new applications. It is not impeachable unless the President did it, not IRS underlings in Ohio. The folks on the right keep saying that liberal political groups with liberal political names got rubber stamped right through....I challenge you all to name one with a reputable source.

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

Ignoring the IRS's repeated violations of conservative Americans' Constitutional rights. That the IRS specifically targeted groups that opposed Obama-care, promoted the Constitution, advocate small government or oppose homosexual marriage. And the fact that Obama is Chief Law Enforcement Officer whose legal obligation is to oversee and prevent abuses like this. This was no accident. Even if it is never connected to the White House, it's Obama's thuggish Chicago style of politics and was what he wanted. Impeach! Impeach! Impeach! Hey asshat, you do know that everything you listed the constitution, Obama-care, gay marriage. They are all political. There is no social welfare in any of those. If that is what they were about than they should have been investigated and they should have been denied. 501 4 is specific and meant for those groups who engage is acts for social welfare. Who might run an occasional ad to further their goals. It was not created to hide black money for political endeavors. Gee ...the dems asked that the IRS investigate a "social welfare" group that was founded by Karl Rove..Oh noes...Karl Rove isn't political (sarcasm) and those ads that his "social welfare" group produced with the same cast and verbiage as the ads his "political" group produced, why that is just a coincidence. Rove is innocent.(blazing sarcasm)

User avatar
MotherJonses

Post

User avatar
  
  
Posts: 73

Wingnut StupidityWhenever we start to elevate animals above humans, we've crossed a moral line. For example, when there's a sexual predator out there, who has impregnated a young girl, say a 13-year-old girl - and it happens in America more times than you or I would like to think - that sexual predator can take that girl off the playground of a middle school, and haul her across a state line, and force her to get an abortion to eradicate the evidence of his crime, and bring her back and drop her off at the swing set. And that's not against the law in the United States....Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. Since when is it not against the law to have sex with a 13 year old girl, or to kidnap her and take her across state lines? Really this fool thinks the laws against statutory rape, kidnapping, and crossing state lines to commit a crime are merely suggestions? He thinks that the abortion would eradicate her broken hymen,her testimony, the medical records and testimony of clinic staff and the cells containing his DNA that were removed from the girl? And finally he thinks that it can all be done in less time than her parents would notice her missing? I am temped to add that he thinks 13 year old girls hang out at swing sets in parks too.