Is Obama a Marxist?

[saxitoxin]

he went to college as a foreign exchange student

Wait - he graduated from high school in Hawai'i and attended university in California and New York.

I just looked into it and the Hawaiians are claiming they're part of the U.S. (http://portal.ehawaii.gov/visiting/visiting-hawaii.html). Then again, I guess we shouldn't believe everything we read on the Internet. Gang, I'll check into this some more.

[thegreekdog]

Clue #1, Obama actively sought out and looked for "Marxist professors".

but by all means keep ignoring the most obvious evidence, keep besmirching and minimizing and laughing it off.

Big deal. I actively engaged in both solipsism and communism (not at the same time) for a time when I was younger. I am not remotely a Solipsist nor a Communist.

I had sex with mutliple Jewish women in college. Does that mean I'm a Zionist?

No. But if you were only seeking out Jewish snatch, I would think there was a reason....

and to the other comment. Yeah we know "big deal" when it comes to "Obama seeking out Marxist professors" and "Obama is a Marxist" We know, we know, 2 TOTALLY different topics, not related to each other in any way.....we know...

All I notice is the constant scrapping of the most obvious evidence....

Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I only had sex with one non-Jewish woman in college.

The problem with your obvious evidence is that it is obvious evidence that he may have been empathetic to Marxist ideas in college.

There is a lot of evidence, much more recent, that tends to show he's not a Marxist. And yet you're ignoring that evidence, aren't you?

...and the obvious evidence that he was extremely empathetic to Marxist ideas in college is one of many pieces of evidence that he has a long, LONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG history of empathy for Marxism.

Remember, it's not like he went to college and said "Well, I'm open to new ideas, sure, let's see what Marxism is about." he went to college as a foreign exchange student and purposefully, immediately sought out Marxist professors. Marxism is where he felt "comfortable"

thirdly, no, I am not ignoring recent evidence. I think that way of going about it is barking up the wrong tree. You can look for evidence all your life, but your search would take a different path if you admitted he was doing everything possible to hide it, even sealing his college records...

So what Marxist policies did the president implement in his first term as president (or in his first term in Congress)?

[Phatscotty]

because Obama is, that's why. It's not about evidence, who can say for sure? Do you really suggest every person we meet, we go against our gut feelings in wondering if a person is stable, or intelligent, or beautiful? I mean, there is no evidence that can prove the beauty....it's obviously an opinion, based on nothing more than Obama, his family, his upbringing, his college, his mentors, his leftism, his redistributionism, his internationalism, his hatred of Liberty, his desire to undo our founding principles, which are the biggest enemy of Marxism or any Communist/Socialist offshoots...

[thegreekdog]

because Obama is, that's why. It's not about evidence, who can say for sure? Do you really suggest every person we meet, we go against our gut feelings in wondering if a person is stable, or intelligent, or beautiful? I mean, there is no evidence that can prove the beauty....it's obviously an opinion, based on nothing more than Obama, his family, his upbringing, his college, his mentors, his leftism, his redistributionism, his internationalism...

Which of his policies reflect those things? You're being willfully ignorant here PS. If you had made three posts ever saying how you're not voting for Obama because he's a Marxist, then I would leave you alone. But you've made hundreds of posts about Obama and his dangerous socialism and Marxist tendencies, so I'm not going to leave you alone. The first goal is for you to admit that he's not a Marxist. Goal number two is for you to admit he's a corporate stooge and a good example of a good Republican. But let's start with goal #1 first. The Marxists don't believe he's a Marxist. The liberals don't believe he's a liberal or a Marxist. Let's get you there too.

[saxitoxin]

because Obama is, that's why. It's not about evidence, who can say for sure? Do you really suggest every person we meet, we go against our gut feelings in wondering if a person is stable, or intelligent, or beautiful? I mean, there is no evidence that can prove the beauty....it's obviously an opinion, based on nothing more than Obama, his family, his upbringing, his college, his mentors, his leftism, his redistributionism, his internationalism...

I don't think that's how opinions work.

[Phatscotty]

let me put it another way.

If Obama got to do everything he wanted, would Marx smile upon the results, or frown?

[saxitoxin]

If Obama got to do everything he wanted

Like from 2008-2010?

[Phatscotty]

because Obama is, that's why. It's not about evidence, who can say for sure? Do you really suggest every person we meet, we go against our gut feelings in wondering if a person is stable, or intelligent, or beautiful? I mean, there is no evidence that can prove the beauty....it's obviously an opinion, based on nothing more than Obama, his family, his upbringing, his college, his mentors, his leftism, his redistributionism, his internationalism...

Which of his policies reflect those things? You're being willfully ignorant here PS.

No I'm not Dog. I just reject that the only way to judge him is by his policies, when policies are dependent on so many different things. It's barking up the wrong tree

but if you need a statement that has a major impact on his policies, here is one...

Why not start with "spreading the wealth around"

[thegreekdog]

because Obama is, that's why. It's not about evidence, who can say for sure? Do you really suggest every person we meet, we go against our gut feelings in wondering if a person is stable, or intelligent, or beautiful? I mean, there is no evidence that can prove the beauty....it's obviously an opinion, based on nothing more than Obama, his family, his upbringing, his college, his mentors, his leftism, his redistributionism, his internationalism...

Which of his policies reflect those things? You're being willfully ignorant here PS.

No I'm not Dog. I just reject that the only way to judge him is by his policies, when policies are dependent on so many different things. It's barking up the wrong tree

but if you need a statement that has a major impact on his policies, here is one...

So in what order would you place the importance of the following to determining how to judge someone:

(1) College professors
(2) Religion or racial makeup of girls banged in college
(3) Statements made on campaign
(4) Laws signed, policies implemented, and general governing

Or to prove the point a different way - Have you looked in to Mitt Romney's college professors? Does it bother you that he worked for Bain Capital? Or do you look at Romney's campaign statements and government policies when he was governor of Massachusetts?

I just reject that the only way to judge him is by his policies, when policies are dependent on so many different things.

Plus, you know, with this comment you've pretty much denigrated anything you previously said. If policies are "dependent on so many different things" why do you care if Obama the dictator would rule as a Marxist? In other words, if, with a Democratic-controlled Congress for two years, he didn't do anything socialist, what's he going to do that scares you so much?

[Phatscotty]

because Obama is, that's why. It's not about evidence, who can say for sure? Do you really suggest every person we meet, we go against our gut feelings in wondering if a person is stable, or intelligent, or beautiful? I mean, there is no evidence that can prove the beauty....it's obviously an opinion, based on nothing more than Obama, his family, his upbringing, his college, his mentors, his leftism, his redistributionism, his internationalism...

Which of his policies reflect those things? You're being willfully ignorant here PS.

No I'm not Dog. I just reject that the only way to judge him is by his policies, when policies are dependent on so many different things. It's barking up the wrong tree

but if you need a statement that has a major impact on his policies, here is one...

So in what order would you place the importance of the following to determining how to judge someone:

(1) College professors
(2) Religion or racial makeup of girls banged in college
(3) Statements made on campaign
(4) Laws signed, policies implemented, and general governing

Or to prove the point a different way - Have you looked in to Mitt Romney's college professors? Does it bother you that he worked for Bain Capital? Or do you look at Romney's campaign statements and government policies when he was governor of Massachusetts?

whatever happens, thanks for asking real questions. This is how discussions should be had...

College professors
statements on campaign
laws signed
girl banged in college

Those things about Romney do not bother me, no.

[saxitoxin]

Why not start with "spreading the wealth around"

That's a Keynesian idea based on the Theory of Underconsumption. There's a tangentially similar (vaguely) Marxist idea based on the Theory of Class Struggle.

In other words, (IMO) brocolli tastes bad and escargot tastes bad. It does not follow that escargot is, therefore, a vegetable.

[Phatscotty]

because Obama is, that's why. It's not about evidence, who can say for sure? Do you really suggest every person we meet, we go against our gut feelings in wondering if a person is stable, or intelligent, or beautiful? I mean, there is no evidence that can prove the beauty....it's obviously an opinion, based on nothing more than Obama, his family, his upbringing, his college, his mentors, his leftism, his redistributionism, his internationalism...

Which of his policies reflect those things? You're being willfully ignorant here PS.

No I'm not Dog. I just reject that the only way to judge him is by his policies, when policies are dependent on so many different things. It's barking up the wrong tree

but if you need a statement that has a major impact on his policies, here is one...

So in what order would you place the importance of the following to determining how to judge someone:

(1) College professors
(2) Religion or racial makeup of girls banged in college
(3) Statements made on campaign
(4) Laws signed, policies implemented, and general governing

Or to prove the point a different way - Have you looked in to Mitt Romney's college professors? Does it bother you that he worked for Bain Capital? Or do you look at Romney's campaign statements and government policies when he was governor of Massachusetts?

I just reject that the only way to judge him is by his policies, when policies are dependent on so many different things.

Plus, you know, with this comment you've pretty much denigrated anything you previously said. If policies are "dependent on so many different things" why do you care if Obama the dictator would rule as a Marxist? In other words, if, with a Democratic-controlled Congress for two years, he didn't do anything socialist, what's he going to do that scares you so much?

oops, didn't see the other half. I understand your statement, but the answer is I care because his Marxism will flare up more once he does not have to fear losing an election. As with any undercover Marxist, I would expect them to act the way you guys are labeling him.

I'm just saying it's a front

Obamacare is not Socialist? Would you at least admit it's purpose is to "spread the wealth around" and "redistribute money". At least that's why I think the IRS is in control of enforcing Obamacare...

[Phatscotty]

Why not start with "spreading the wealth around"

That's a Keynesian idea based on the Theory of Underconsumption. There's a tangentially similar (vaguely) Marxist idea based on the Theory of Class Struggle.

In other words, (IMO) brocolli tastes bad and escargot tastes bad. It does not follow that escargot is, therefore, a vegetable.

Saxi, I love you like a pervy uncle, and even if I hated you, you are still a legend, but don't think I'm ignoring you tonight. My company just got here and Greek has been hogging me for a bit, but I will get back to you

[Metsfanmax]

let me put it another way.

If Obama got to do everything he wanted, would Marx smile upon the results, or frown?

I think that if you have to ask this question, you haven't read the Communist Manifesto.

[saxitoxin]

In Keynesianism, portions of wealth need to be periodically redistributed from the productive to the consumptive class to sustain economic growth.

In Marxism, portions of wealth need to be periodically redistributed from the productive to the consumptive class to defeat a global conspiracy being engineered by the Uradel and their allies in the Roman Catholic Church and the landed bourgeois.

Barack Obama is a fairly run-of-the-mill Keynesian mixed with a heavy dose of run-of-the-mill corruption.

Saxi, I love you like a pervy uncle, and even if I hated you, you are still a legend, but don't think I'm ignoring you tonight. My company just got here and Greek has been hogging me for a bit, but I will get back to you

OK, fair enough. TGD's hog can be filling (according to the Jews).

[thegreekdog]

because Obama is, that's why. It's not about evidence, who can say for sure? Do you really suggest every person we meet, we go against our gut feelings in wondering if a person is stable, or intelligent, or beautiful? I mean, there is no evidence that can prove the beauty....it's obviously an opinion, based on nothing more than Obama, his family, his upbringing, his college, his mentors, his leftism, his redistributionism, his internationalism...

Which of his policies reflect those things? You're being willfully ignorant here PS.

No I'm not Dog. I just reject that the only way to judge him is by his policies, when policies are dependent on so many different things. It's barking up the wrong tree

but if you need a statement that has a major impact on his policies, here is one...

So in what order would you place the importance of the following to determining how to judge someone:

(1) College professors
(2) Religion or racial makeup of girls banged in college
(3) Statements made on campaign
(4) Laws signed, policies implemented, and general governing

Or to prove the point a different way - Have you looked in to Mitt Romney's college professors? Does it bother you that he worked for Bain Capital? Or do you look at Romney's campaign statements and government policies when he was governor of Massachusetts?

I just reject that the only way to judge him is by his policies, when policies are dependent on so many different things.

Plus, you know, with this comment you've pretty much denigrated anything you previously said. If policies are "dependent on so many different things" why do you care if Obama the dictator would rule as a Marxist? In other words, if, with a Democratic-controlled Congress for two years, he didn't do anything socialist, what's he going to do that scares you so much?

oops, didn't see the other half. I understand your statement, but the answer is I care because his Marxism will flare up more once he does not have to fear losing an election. As with any undercover Marxist, I would expect them to act the way you guys are labeling him.

I'm just saying it's a front

Obamacare is not Socialist? Would you at least admit it's purpose is to "spread the wealth around" and "redistribute money". At least that's why I think the IRS is in control of enforcing Obamacare...

If the president would have signed tax increases on the wealthy or would have instituted true socialized medicine, I would be more likely to be concerned with his "spreading the wealth around" comments. Since he didn't, I'm not.

[Phatscotty]

and if he gets re-elected, you will see both of those happen

[thegreekdog]

and if he gets re-elected, you will see both of those happen

I don't think so. But let's make a bet, same as I offered to Night Strike.

[Phatscotty]

and if he gets re-elected, you will see both of those happen

I don't think so. But let's make a bet, same as I offered to Night Strike.

You would bet that if Obama wins, he won't raise taxes?

If yes, then you got yourself a bet

what did you and strike bet on?

[thegreekdog]

and if he gets re-elected, you will see both of those happen

I don't think so. But let's make a bet, same as I offered to Night Strike.

You would bet that if Obama wins, he won't raise taxes?

If yes, then you got yourself a bet

what did you and strike bet on?

Woah... that's not my bet at all.

[Phatscotty]

and if he gets re-elected, you will see both of those happen

I don't think so. But let's make a bet, same as I offered to Night Strike.

You would bet that if Obama wins, he won't raise taxes?

If yes, then you got yourself a bet

what did you and strike bet on?

Woah... that's not my bet at all.

Go ahead and offer the bet then. if it's along the lines of what we are talking about, I am interested. But also you did just say you don't think taxes will go up (on the rich) or that obamacare will become more socialized than it is, little by little, over time...to camouflage the socialism (in other words, the usual)

[thegreekdog]

and if he gets re-elected, you will see both of those happen

I don't think so. But let's make a bet, same as I offered to Night Strike.

You would bet that if Obama wins, he won't raise taxes?

If yes, then you got yourself a bet

what did you and strike bet on?

Woah... that's not my bet at all.

Go ahead and offer the bet then. if it's along the lines of what we are talking about, I am interested. But also you did just say you don't think taxes will go up (on the rich) or that obamacare will become more socialized than it is, little by little, over time...to camouflage the socialism (in other words, the usual)

Marxism does not hinge on taxes (first of all). Second of all, I will not bet that the Bush tax cuts will not be allowed to expire. I do think there will not be any additional tax increases other than the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.

[spurgistan]

What? I've read the Communist Manifesto, and it was literally all about how in 2012 we should move to a 39.6% tax rate on income over $250,000. Clearly, only scotty and I've read that.

[Metsfanmax]

Woah

I hate this.

[Phatscotty]

and if he gets re-elected, you will see both of those happen

I don't think so. But let's make a bet, same as I offered to Night Strike.

You would bet that if Obama wins, he won't raise taxes?

If yes, then you got yourself a bet

what did you and strike bet on?

Woah... that's not my bet at all.

Go ahead and offer the bet then. if it's along the lines of what we are talking about, I am interested. But also you did just say you don't think taxes will go up (on the rich) or that obamacare will become more socialized than it is, little by little, over time...to camouflage the socialism (in other words, the usual)

Marxism does not hinge on taxes (first of all). Second of all, I will not bet that the Bush tax cuts will not be allowed to expire. I do think there will not be any additional tax increases other than the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.

what other way can they redistribute more effeciently, besides confiscation? Of course it does not HINGE on high taxes. pretty cheap to act like that is the argument, and i still chuckle at how you guys will only accept a pure 100% marxist action dictates version of a Marxist as a possible Marxist. He sought out Marxist professors. Maybe that is irrelevant to the discussion if Obama is a Marxist in your eyes, but for me it's a major clue. Possibly even a a raging clue. there is just way too much other evidence even if you could make it impossible to judge all Marxist based on what Marxist does not hinge on

what Marxism hinges on was not the topic of discussion, but nice try. Your comment is a side step