Conquer Club

Is Obama a Marxist?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Is Obama a Marxist?

 
Total votes : 0

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Phatscotty on Fri Aug 17, 2012 1:56 am

saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's.


No, this did not happen. There are six unarguably national Communist parties operating in the United States under the following names:

- Revolutionary Communist Party (Maoist)

- Communist Party USA (Paleo-Marxist)

- Workers World (Juche)

- Socialist Workers Party (Pathfinder)

- Socialist Party USA (Trotskyist)

- Party of Socialism and Liberation (?)

I've never heard of an extant group called the Progressive Party. I bing-dot-commed for their website but couldn't find it.


I'm pretty sure they did. And I know the links are in the forum because I posted it before. I'll have to find them tomorrow, and you will have to wait until then to tear it apart.

EDIT: Here is one starting point down a different rabbit hole
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby saxitoxin on Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:16 am

Phatscotty wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's.


No, this did not happen. There are six unarguably national Communist parties operating in the United States under the following names:

- Revolutionary Communist Party (Maoist)

- Communist Party USA (Paleo-Marxist)

- Workers World (Juche)

- Socialist Workers Party (Pathfinder)

- Socialist Party USA (Trotskyist)

- Party of Socialism and Liberation (?)

I've never heard of an extant group called the Progressive Party. I bing-dot-commed for their website but couldn't find it.


I'm pretty sure they did. And I know the links are in the forum because I posted it before. I'll have to find them tomorrow, and you will have to wait until then to tear it apart. I know the first Progressive Party was founded in 1912, and the Communist Party at that time ceased I think in 1909m then came back in 1919, then changed back to the progressive party again in 1924, etc


The only reference I could find to the event you described ("The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's.") was in a joke made by Allan West on YouTube.

The Progressive Party founded in 1912 was created entirely as a personal political vehicle for Teddy Roosevelt to run for President after he failed to get the Republican Party nomination, and was named that because Roosevelt supported women's suffrage. It folded almost immediately after Roosevelt lost the election. It was definitely not a Communist Party and I have never heard any mainstream - or even fringe - history text claim the former Republican president Teddy Roosevelt was a Communist. There are many parts of history that are debatable, however, arguing whether the Soviet Union in 1917 or the U.S. in 1900 was the world's first nation with a communist government is probably not one of them.

    Also, any group founded before 1935 is easy to identify as a Communist Party because they were required, under the rules of the COMINTERN, to name themselves Communist Party of France, Communist Party of Mexico, Communist Party of the United States, etc.
Last edited by saxitoxin on Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImage
User avatar
Corporal saxitoxin
 
Posts: 11995
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:20 am

saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's.


No, this did not happen. There are six unarguably national Communist parties operating in the United States under the following names:

- Revolutionary Communist Party (Maoist)

- Communist Party USA (Paleo-Marxist)

- Workers World (Juche)

- Socialist Workers Party (Pathfinder)

- Socialist Party USA (Trotskyist)

- Party of Socialism and Liberation (?)

I've never heard of an extant group called the Progressive Party. I bing-dot-commed for their website but couldn't find it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

is what PS probably means by "progressives."
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Phatscotty on Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:21 am

haha well I was careful to say "I think" because I knew I wasn't totally sure, but I found this. Although I think most of the nutmeat is in the first half of the article, I'm sharing the whole thing because it's an interesting read.

The Communists in America were raided in the early late 10's and early 20's, and they needed to go underground. A face lift and a name change would eventually come with that. Please note I am not sharing this as some smoking gun piece of evidence, but I have to go to bed and we'll get into it tomorrow. I promise

Communist party, in the United States
in the United States, political party that espoused the Marxist-Leninist principles of communism.

Origins

The first Communist parties in the United States were founded in 1919 by dissident factions of the Socialist party. The larger, which called itself the Communist party of America, consisted of many of the former foreign language federations of the Socialist party, in particular the Russian Federation, and the former Michigan Socialist party. The other, named the Communist Labor party, was led by Benjamin Gitlow and John Reed. The parties immediately became subject to raids by agents of Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer and local authorities. These raids resulted in a sharp drop in party membership and, in Jan., 1920, forced the Communists to go underground.

Early Years

In May, 1921, under strong pressure from the Third (Communist) International, or Comintern, the Communist groups in the United States were united as the Communist Party of America. The Comintern also forced a change away from revolutionary militancy to working through established labor organizations and developing a mass following. Accordingly, in Dec., 1921, the Communists organized the Workers party of America, as a legal, acknowledged organization, and by 1923 the underground party had ceased to function. Attempts were made to work through the growing farmer-labor movement of the early 1920s, but they failed, opposed by most farmer-labor leaders and Progressive leader, Senator Robert La Follette. Unsuccessful Communist-led strikes among textile workers in Passaic, N.J. (1926), in New Bedford, Mass. (1928), and among New York City garment workers (1926) also lessened Communist influence in trade unions.

During this period two factions developed within the party. One, led by Jay Lovestone, was generally socialist in background and concerned with political theory. The other, led by William Z. Foster and Earl Browder, was more syndicalist in background and interested in union activity. These two groups alternated in party leadership until 1929, when the Comintern ordered that Foster's group gain control to carry out the Comintern policy line established at its Sixth World Congress (1928). The party was renamed the Communist party of the United States of America.

This era, called the Third Period, saw the development of the theory of "social fascism," by which labor and socialist leaders were denounced as more dangerous enemies of the workers than the fascists. American Communists also made a major appeal for African-American support, calling for the creation of a black republic in the South, on the grounds that African Americans were a national, not a racial, minority. The adoption of the new party line coincided with the beginning of the depression of 1929, and as the economic crisis grew, Communist membership increased. However, its policies isolated the Communists both in politics and in the unions, so that despite increased membership and some success in organizing the unemployed, the party's influence remained small.

Popular Front and World War II

In 1935 the Seventh World Congress of the Comintern announced another change of direction. It now stressed the need for a "popular front," a movement to create political coalitions of all antifascist groups. In the United States, the Communists abandoned opposition to the New Deal; they reentered the mainstream of the trade union movement and played an important part in organizing new unions for the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), for the first time gaining important positions of power in the union movement. As antifascist activists they attracted the support of many non-Communists during this period.

The party's attacks on Nazi Germany ended abruptly with the signing of the Hitler-Stalin nonaggression pact in Aug., 1939, and World War II, which immediately followed, was denounced as an "imperialist" war caused by Great Britain and France. American defense preparations and aid to the Western democracies were vigorously opposed as "war-mongering," and Communist-dominated unions were quick to go out on strike. However, when Germany attacked Russia in June, 1941, the Communist position on the war changed overnight from "imperialist" to "democratic." The party, under the leadership of Earl Browder, now went all out in its support of the war. Strikes were opposed as a hindrance to the war effort, and in 1944 the U.S. Communist party "disbanded" as a political party to become the Communist Political Association.

The Cold War

In 1945, Browder's policy was attacked as being one of the "right deviationism," and he was replaced by William Foster. This change in line and the beginning of the cold war brought the party, which had achieved relative respectability during the war, under renewed attack. In 1948 the Communists supported the presidential candidacy of Henry A. Wallace on the Progressive party ticket, but he obtained only slightly more than a million votes.

Communist influence in labor unions came under increasing attack. The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 denied the facilities of the National Labor Relations Board to unions that failed to file affidavits avowing that their officers were not Communists, and in 1949Ā—50 the CIO expelled unions that were still Communist-dominated. In Mar., 1947, President Truman barred Communists or Communist sympathizers from employment in the executive branch of the federal government. The sensational confessions of former Communists, such as Whittaker Chambers, and increasing evidence of Communist espionage led to highly publicized investigations by Congress (especially by the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Senate Subcommittee on Government Operations), the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and federal grand juries.

In Oct., 1949, 11 top Communist leaders were convicted on charges of conspiring to advocate the overthrow of the U.S. government. In June, 1951, the Supreme Court found the Smith Act of 1940, under which the convictions had been obtained, constitutional, and the government proceeded to bring many lesser Communist officials to trial. In 1950 the McCarran Internal Security Act required that all Communist and Communist-dominated organizations register with the federal government the names of all members and contributors, and the Communist Control Act of 1954 further strengthened the provisions of the McCarran Act by providing severe penalties for Communists who failed to register, denying collective bargaining power to Communist-dominated unions, and taking away the "rights, privileges and immunities" of the Communist party as a legal organization. At the same time many states passed "little Smith Acts," with such provisions as the requirement of loyalty oaths from state employees and the denial of a place on the ballot to Communist parties. This was also the period of Senator Joseph McCarthy's hysterical search for Communists in all branches of government.

In 1956, Nikita Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin's excesses, along with the Russian suppression of the Hungarian revolt in that same year, created new schisms in the U.S. Communist party, which lost thousands of members. The Supreme Court has upheld many of the provisions of the Smith and McCarran acts as they apply to the leadership of the Communist party, but several decisions of the 1960s substantially voided sanctions against the rank and file except where some active conspiracy against U.S. security is proved. As a result the party resumed open activities in 1966 and ran candidates in presidential elections, but the contemporary party is a very minor political force. In the late 1980s, party leader Gus Hall criticized the Gorbachev reforms in the USSR, but as Communism collapsed in the USSR, it was claimed that Hall had received $2 million from the Soviet party. Subsequent declassification (1995Ā—96) of intercepted Soviet cables confirmed that party members had indeed spied for the Soviet Union before and during the cold war, although some scholars questioned the extent to which the cables could trusted.


http://education.yahoo.com/reference/en ... CommunisUS
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby saxitoxin on Fri Aug 17, 2012 2:27 am

Phatscotty wrote:haha well I was careful to say "I think" because I knew I wasn't totally sure, but I found this. Although I think most of the nutmeat is in the first half of the article, I'm sharing the whole thing because it's an interesting read.

The Communists in America were raided in the early late 10's and early 20's, and they needed to go underground. A face lift and a name change came with that. Please note I am not sharing this as some smoking gun piece of evidence, but I have to go to bed and we'll get into it tomorrow. I promise

Communist party, in the United States
in the United States, political party that espoused the Marxist-Leninist principles of communism.

Origins

The first Communist parties in the United States were founded in 1919 by dissident factions of the Socialist party. The larger, which called itself the Communist party of America, consisted of many of the former foreign language federations of the Socialist party, in particular the Russian Federation, and the former Michigan Socialist party. The other, named the Communist Labor party, was led by Benjamin Gitlow and John Reed. The parties immediately became subject to raids by agents of Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer and local authorities. These raids resulted in a sharp drop in party membership and, in Jan., 1920, forced the Communists to go underground.

Early Years

In May, 1921, under strong pressure from the Third (Communist) International, or Comintern, the Communist groups in the United States were united as the Communist Party of America. The Comintern also forced a change away from revolutionary militancy to working through established labor organizations and developing a mass following. Accordingly, in Dec., 1921, the Communists organized the Workers party of America, as a legal, acknowledged organization, and by 1923 the underground party had ceased to function. Attempts were made to work through the growing farmer-labor movement of the early 1920s, but they failed, opposed by most farmer-labor leaders and Progressive leader, Senator Robert La Follette. Unsuccessful Communist-led strikes among textile workers in Passaic, N.J. (1926), in New Bedford, Mass. (1928), and among New York City garment workers (1926) also lessened Communist influence in trade unions.

During this period two factions developed within the party. One, led by Jay Lovestone, was generally socialist in background and concerned with political theory. The other, led by William Z. Foster and Earl Browder, was more syndicalist in background and interested in union activity. These two groups alternated in party leadership until 1929, when the Comintern ordered that Foster's group gain control to carry out the Comintern policy line established at its Sixth World Congress (1928). The party was renamed the Communist party of the United States of America.

This era, called the Third Period, saw the development of the theory of "social fascism," by which labor and socialist leaders were denounced as more dangerous enemies of the workers than the fascists. American Communists also made a major appeal for African-American support, calling for the creation of a black republic in the South, on the grounds that African Americans were a national, not a racial, minority. The adoption of the new party line coincided with the beginning of the depression of 1929, and as the economic crisis grew, Communist membership increased. However, its policies isolated the Communists both in politics and in the unions, so that despite increased membership and some success in organizing the unemployed, the party's influence remained small.

Popular Front and World War II

In 1935 the Seventh World Congress of the Comintern announced another change of direction. It now stressed the need for a "popular front," a movement to create political coalitions of all antifascist groups. In the United States, the Communists abandoned opposition to the New Deal; they reentered the mainstream of the trade union movement and played an important part in organizing new unions for the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), for the first time gaining important positions of power in the union movement. As antifascist activists they attracted the support of many non-Communists during this period.

The party's attacks on Nazi Germany ended abruptly with the signing of the Hitler-Stalin nonaggression pact in Aug., 1939, and World War II, which immediately followed, was denounced as an "imperialist" war caused by Great Britain and France. American defense preparations and aid to the Western democracies were vigorously opposed as "war-mongering," and Communist-dominated unions were quick to go out on strike. However, when Germany attacked Russia in June, 1941, the Communist position on the war changed overnight from "imperialist" to "democratic." The party, under the leadership of Earl Browder, now went all out in its support of the war. Strikes were opposed as a hindrance to the war effort, and in 1944 the U.S. Communist party "disbanded" as a political party to become the Communist Political Association.

The Cold War

In 1945, Browder's policy was attacked as being one of the "right deviationism," and he was replaced by William Foster. This change in line and the beginning of the cold war brought the party, which had achieved relative respectability during the war, under renewed attack. In 1948 the Communists supported the presidential candidacy of Henry A. Wallace on the Progressive party ticket, but he obtained only slightly more than a million votes.

Communist influence in labor unions came under increasing attack. The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 denied the facilities of the National Labor Relations Board to unions that failed to file affidavits avowing that their officers were not Communists, and in 1949Ā—50 the CIO expelled unions that were still Communist-dominated. In Mar., 1947, President Truman barred Communists or Communist sympathizers from employment in the executive branch of the federal government. The sensational confessions of former Communists, such as Whittaker Chambers, and increasing evidence of Communist espionage led to highly publicized investigations by Congress (especially by the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Senate Subcommittee on Government Operations), the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and federal grand juries.

In Oct., 1949, 11 top Communist leaders were convicted on charges of conspiring to advocate the overthrow of the U.S. government. In June, 1951, the Supreme Court found the Smith Act of 1940, under which the convictions had been obtained, constitutional, and the government proceeded to bring many lesser Communist officials to trial. In 1950 the McCarran Internal Security Act required that all Communist and Communist-dominated organizations register with the federal government the names of all members and contributors, and the Communist Control Act of 1954 further strengthened the provisions of the McCarran Act by providing severe penalties for Communists who failed to register, denying collective bargaining power to Communist-dominated unions, and taking away the "rights, privileges and immunities" of the Communist party as a legal organization. At the same time many states passed "little Smith Acts," with such provisions as the requirement of loyalty oaths from state employees and the denial of a place on the ballot to Communist parties. This was also the period of Senator Joseph McCarthy's hysterical search for Communists in all branches of government.

In 1956, Nikita Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin's excesses, along with the Russian suppression of the Hungarian revolt in that same year, created new schisms in the U.S. Communist party, which lost thousands of members. The Supreme Court has upheld many of the provisions of the Smith and McCarran acts as they apply to the leadership of the Communist party, but several decisions of the 1960s substantially voided sanctions against the rank and file except where some active conspiracy against U.S. security is proved. As a result the party resumed open activities in 1966 and ran candidates in presidential elections, but the contemporary party is a very minor political force. In the late 1980s, party leader Gus Hall criticized the Gorbachev reforms in the USSR, but as Communism collapsed in the USSR, it was claimed that Hall had received $2 million from the Soviet party. Subsequent declassification (1995Ā—96) of intercepted Soviet cables confirmed that party members had indeed spied for the Soviet Union before and during the cold war, although some scholars questioned the extent to which the cables could trusted.


http://education.yahoo.com/reference/en ... CommunisUS


I just did a CTRL+F and didn't see any references to Obama.

I did find two references to two separate groups called "Progressive Party."

    According to Wikipedia, the first "Progressive Party" which - according to the article Scott provided - opposed communists, existed from 1924 to 1948 and was unrelated to Teddy Roosevelt's "Progressive Party" (1912-1916).

    According to Wikipedia, the second "Progressive Party" existed for 7 years from 1948-1955, was also unrelated to Teddy Roosevelt's "Progressive Party" (1912-1916). Their candidate was cross-endorsed by the CPUSA in one election.
I don't believe this demonstrates "The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's."
ImageImage
User avatar
Corporal saxitoxin
 
Posts: 11995
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:22 am

Yeah, but that's what they want you to think.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby saxitoxin on Fri Aug 17, 2012 3:31 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:Yeah, but that's what they want you to think.


ImageImage
User avatar
Corporal saxitoxin
 
Posts: 11995
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Fri Aug 17, 2012 4:00 am

That's the best I've ever seen of Alex Jones.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby thegreekdog on Fri Aug 17, 2012 7:19 am

Okay, here's the deal PS. Your definition of Obama as a marxist and/or progressive hinges upon things he's said or people he's associated with. My definition of Obama as a Republican in Democrat clothing hinges upon the laws he's signed and the policies he's implemented since being president. Are you saying that a better barometer of the president's political ideology is what he's said and people he's associated with? If the answer to that question is yes, you are delusional, but let's say the answer is yes. If the answer is yes, my response is, "so what?" since the evidence of the last four years points to him being a Republican, not a marxist and not a progressive.

Let me give you a simple example - I can say that I prefer the Waterloo map to all other maps. I an in a user group that mostly plays the Waterloo map. If I have never played Waterloo, does that make me a Waterloo player? No, it does not.

This is not a criticism of your being able to criticize the president. Rather, this is a criticism of how you have labelled the president and how you present your arguments. He is NOT a Marxist. He is NOT a progressive.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Woodruff on Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:11 am

saxitoxin wrote:Image


That is a great picture/caption combo. <chuckle>
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Woodruff on Fri Aug 17, 2012 8:14 am

Phatscotty wrote:I wish to challenge the progressive assertion. The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's. They may have dropped a couple of planks from their agenda over the last century, but I would say the drops are more due to being outdated. You seem to agree there are some/many similarities, I would just state it's my opinion that the similarities that Progressives share with Communists/Marxists are many/barely indistinguishable. Especially with all the class warfare and racial and social division that is starting to be called "acceptable".


It's humorous that you believe the "class warfare and racial and social division that is starting to be called 'acceptable'" is coming solely from the Democrats. Not surprising...just humorous.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Gillipig on Fri Aug 17, 2012 11:31 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:In order to answer this question, I'll assume "Marxist" means "one who wishes to implement the means and seeks the ends as described in the Communist Manifesto."


Is there any other valid use of the word Marxist? Is marxist like racist? What you call someone you don't like but can't explain why?

Oh.....It's you. Excuse me I thought I was speaking to someone else.
AoG for President of the World!!
I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!
User avatar
Lieutenant Gillipig
 
Posts: 3565
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 1:24 pm

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby AndyDufresne on Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:21 pm

Night Strike wrote:Enacting laws without Congressional approval while ignoring laws already on the books. Yesterday was the first official day of his illegal Dream Act Amnesty Program.

Did Reagan and IranContra do all that?

Or, here is another good dateline from 1987:

WASHINGTON ā€” With 17 months of his presidency remaining, Ronald Reagan will bank on executive orders and judicial action to implement social policies that he cannot persuade Congress to enact, Gary L. Bauer, the President's chief domestic policy adviser, declared Thursday.

Bauer, the feisty attorney Reagan named to push his social issue agenda, said the President may accomplish some of his goals in such areas as abortion and pornography through a series of executive orders and by his appointment of conservative judges to the federal judiciary, including his nomination of Judge Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court.

"With a hostile Congress that doesn't show much sign of coming toward us on some of these issues, it behooves us to take the initiative when we can take it," Bauer said.

There are a number of things "the President can unilaterally do," Bauer said, as evidenced by the plan Reagan announced three weeks ago to curb federal funding for organizations and groups that support abortion.


Also, two more fun notes from the article on Regan, especially the second item in reference to your concerns about immigration ;) :

--The Administration dropped Reagan's campaign pledge to eliminate the Education Department because it could find no more than seven or eight senators who were willing to endorse the idea and "decided instead to make sure that as long as we're in office anyway that the department runs like a Reagan Department of Education, that is, to emphasize back-to-basic values, that sort of thing."

--He would oppose increasing federal funding to help border states such as California and Texas cope with the additional burden of providing services for illegal immigrants who are becoming legal under the new immigration law. In the long run, he said, the border states "are going to be helped a lot more by a vibrant long-term economic expansion than they will be by whether one categorical program in Washington has a couple billion more dollars in it or not."



--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Woodruff on Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:24 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:
Night Strike wrote:Enacting laws without Congressional approval while ignoring laws already on the books. Yesterday was the first official day of his illegal Dream Act Amnesty Program.

Did Reagan and IranContra do all that?

Or, here is another good dateline from 1987:

WASHINGTON ā€” With 17 months of his presidency remaining, Ronald Reagan will bank on executive orders and judicial action to implement social policies that he cannot persuade Congress to enact, Gary L. Bauer, the President's chief domestic policy adviser, declared Thursday.

Bauer, the feisty attorney Reagan named to push his social issue agenda, said the President may accomplish some of his goals in such areas as abortion and pornography through a series of executive orders and by his appointment of conservative judges to the federal judiciary, including his nomination of Judge Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court.

"With a hostile Congress that doesn't show much sign of coming toward us on some of these issues, it behooves us to take the initiative when we can take it," Bauer said.

There are a number of things "the President can unilaterally do," Bauer said, as evidenced by the plan Reagan announced three weeks ago to curb federal funding for organizations and groups that support abortion.


Also, two more fun notes from the article on Regan, especially the second item in reference to your concerns about immigration ;) :

--The Administration dropped Reagan's campaign pledge to eliminate the Education Department because it could find no more than seven or eight senators who were willing to endorse the idea and "decided instead to make sure that as long as we're in office anyway that the department runs like a Reagan Department of Education, that is, to emphasize back-to-basic values, that sort of thing."

--He would oppose increasing federal funding to help border states such as California and Texas cope with the additional burden of providing services for illegal immigrants who are becoming legal under the new immigration law. In the long run, he said, the border states "are going to be helped a lot more by a vibrant long-term economic expansion than they will be by whether one categorical program in Washington has a couple billion more dollars in it or not."

--Andy


SOROS!!!!!
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Phatscotty on Fri Aug 17, 2012 4:22 pm

BigBallinStalin wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's.


No, this did not happen. There are six unarguably national Communist parties operating in the United States under the following names:

- Revolutionary Communist Party (Maoist)

- Communist Party USA (Paleo-Marxist)

- Workers World (Juche)

- Socialist Workers Party (Pathfinder)

- Socialist Party USA (Trotskyist)

- Party of Socialism and Liberation (?)

I've never heard of an extant group called the Progressive Party. I bing-dot-commed for their website but couldn't find it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

is what PS probably means by "progressives."


Yup. Before peeps start flippin out, yes, I know that the Progressive Party of today is no longer trying to resegregate our military, like Woodrow Wilson did, that the PP of today is no longer making alliances with the Klu Klux Klan, like Woodrow Wilson did, the PP of today no longer seeks to push for abortion of any pregnancies that won't be a white baby, like Margaret Sanger (founder of planned parenthood), but the PP of today does seek to redistribute the wealth, just like FDR, to take from one person and give to another (after the government removes it 50% cut...oops, i mean "waste"), the PP of today does seek to grow the government larger and more powerful, defacto shrinking our Liberty, the PP of today does advocate for universal gov't programs (healthcare, education), the PP of today is just as anti-free markets, anti-free speech, and anti-freedom in general as they always have been. Not that most of them know they are against freedom, but they just think about it wrong (such as the chik-fil-a thing) and they are the source of most of the garbage (just as much by Progressive Republicans as well)

I hold that the PP of today found a new, more useful way to convince their disciples to stay and serve on the plantation, and they have not changed because they realized their history of racism was wrong, but they changed because they are better and smarter and richer now and have different systems to manipulate and control people
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby spurgistan on Fri Aug 17, 2012 4:26 pm

No. Or, at least, his policies are totally divorced from any Marxist influence he may have.

/thread.
Mr_Adams wrote:You, sir, are an idiot.


Timminz wrote:By that logic, you eat babies.
Sergeant spurgistan
 
Posts: 1868
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 11:30 pm

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby thegreekdog on Fri Aug 17, 2012 4:38 pm

thegreekdog wrote:Okay, here's the deal PS. Your definition of Obama as a marxist and/or progressive hinges upon things he's said or people he's associated with. My definition of Obama as a Republican in Democrat clothing hinges upon the laws he's signed and the policies he's implemented since being president. Are you saying that a better barometer of the president's political ideology is what he's said and people he's associated with? If the answer to that question is yes, you are delusional, but let's say the answer is yes. If the answer is yes, my response is, "so what?" since the evidence of the last four years points to him being a Republican, not a marxist and not a progressive.

Let me give you a simple example - I can say that I prefer the Waterloo map to all other maps. I an in a user group that mostly plays the Waterloo map. If I have never played Waterloo, does that make me a Waterloo player? No, it does not.

This is not a criticism of your being able to criticize the president. Rather, this is a criticism of how you have labelled the president and how you present your arguments. He is NOT a Marxist. He is NOT a progressive.


PS - don't make me do this. Just address my post. Don't ignore it because I don't want to have to pull a Woodruff on you and quote it on every page until you answer.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Woodruff on Fri Aug 17, 2012 5:17 pm

Phatscotty wrote:I hold that the PP of today found a new, more useful way to convince their disciples to stay and serve on the plantation, and they have not changed because they realized their history of racism was wrong, but they changed because they are better and smarter and richer now and have different systems to manipulate and control people


It actually makes sense to you that progressives of today think that racism is "right"?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Woodruff on Fri Aug 17, 2012 5:18 pm

thegreekdog wrote:
thegreekdog wrote:Okay, here's the deal PS. Your definition of Obama as a marxist and/or progressive hinges upon things he's said or people he's associated with. My definition of Obama as a Republican in Democrat clothing hinges upon the laws he's signed and the policies he's implemented since being president. Are you saying that a better barometer of the president's political ideology is what he's said and people he's associated with? If the answer to that question is yes, you are delusional, but let's say the answer is yes. If the answer is yes, my response is, "so what?" since the evidence of the last four years points to him being a Republican, not a marxist and not a progressive.

Let me give you a simple example - I can say that I prefer the Waterloo map to all other maps. I an in a user group that mostly plays the Waterloo map. If I have never played Waterloo, does that make me a Waterloo player? No, it does not.

This is not a criticism of your being able to criticize the president. Rather, this is a criticism of how you have labelled the president and how you present your arguments. He is NOT a Marxist. He is NOT a progressive.


PS - don't make me do this. Just address my post. Don't ignore it because I don't want to have to pull a Woodruff on you and quote it on every page until you answer.


Ha! Like that has shamed him into answering them? Good luck.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby saxitoxin on Fri Aug 17, 2012 6:14 pm

Phatscotty wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's.


No, this did not happen. There are six unarguably national Communist parties operating in the United States under the following names:

- Revolutionary Communist Party (Maoist)

- Communist Party USA (Paleo-Marxist)

- Workers World (Juche)

- Socialist Workers Party (Pathfinder)

- Socialist Party USA (Trotskyist)

- Party of Socialism and Liberation (?)

I've never heard of an extant group called the Progressive Party. I bing-dot-commed for their website but couldn't find it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

is what PS probably means by "progressives."


Yup. Before peeps start flippin out, yes, I know that the Progressive Party of today is no longer


Does the Progressive Party have a website? Could you post the URL so we can visit it? It might help to eradicate some of the skepticism you're facing as to whether a national political party called "Progressive Party" exists.
ImageImage
User avatar
Corporal saxitoxin
 
Posts: 11995
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Phatscotty on Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:33 am

thegreekdog wrote:Okay, here's the deal PS. Your definition of Obama as a marxist and/or progressive hinges upon things he's said or people he's associated with. My definition of Obama as a Republican in Democrat clothing hinges upon the laws he's signed and the policies he's implemented since being president. Are you saying that a better barometer of the president's political ideology is what he's said and people he's associated with? If the answer to that question is yes, you are delusional, but let's say the answer is yes. If the answer is yes, my response is, "so what?" since the evidence of the last four years points to him being a Republican, not a marxist and not a progressive.

Let me give you a simple example - I can say that I prefer the Waterloo map to all other maps. I an in a user group that mostly plays the Waterloo map. If I have never played Waterloo, does that make me a Waterloo player? No, it does not.


This is not a criticism of your being able to criticize the president. Rather, this is a criticism of how you have labelled the president and how you present your arguments. He is NOT a Marxist. He is NOT a progressive.


I realize that. I also understand why you say he's the same as any president. Of course words do not match up to actions, but I will say, that because of Obama covering up his paper trail all his life, voting "present" 97% of the time while in the state Senate....."a better barometer of the president's political ideology is what he's said and people he's associated with?" It's not about being better or worse....it's about being all we have! Wait, you mean you think I would actually answer yes to your question? Okay now that's just insulting.

I think Obama is a Leftist, a Collectivist, a socialist, a Marxist, whatever you want to call it....he is about redistributing other peoples wealth, and I believe he is ALL about it, more than any president in recent history, and probably the most since FDR. And I think that because he has surrounded himself with those kind of people, which means he believes in and is comfortable around those kinds of people, and not just in the last 2 years, or the last 4 years.....all...his....life. His friends at the University he taught at, the leader of his church, his spiritual leader today, his mentor from age 10-16, the direction his mother set for him...the guy hung a Mao Christmas ornament on the tree at the White House. Technically, that is an action :P

Would you be able to agree Obama was a Marxist if his college records turn up a thesis paper titled "The Glory of Karl Marx's ball sack"? Or does that just count as "something he said"

Curious: What do you label Obama?
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Phatscotty on Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:51 am

saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's.


No, this did not happen. There are six unarguably national Communist parties operating in the United States under the following names:

- Revolutionary Communist Party (Maoist)

- Communist Party USA (Paleo-Marxist)

- Workers World (Juche)

- Socialist Workers Party (Pathfinder)

- Socialist Party USA (Trotskyist)

- Party of Socialism and Liberation (?)

I've never heard of an extant group called the Progressive Party. I bing-dot-commed for their website but couldn't find it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

is what PS probably means by "progressives."


Yup. Before peeps start flippin out, yes, I know that the Progressive Party of today is no longer


Does the Progressive Party have a website? Could you post the URL so we can visit it? It might help to eradicate some of the skepticism you're facing as to whether a national political party called "Progressive Party" exists.


Okay, I should not have used the word party. But, my choice of words do not change the similarities in the polices of Progressives and Communism or any other theories or philosophies based on or attributed to Marx.

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/
Progressive Caucus, in the Democrat party. I think there are roughly 78-81 members in the House

Edit: These videos have nothing specific to do with the discussion, other than it's another opinion of the same charge and a little more background at the progressive roots.



User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby saxitoxin on Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:20 am

Phatscotty wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:The Communist party of America officially changed their name to the Progressive Party of America sometime in the early 1900's.


No, this did not happen. There are six unarguably national Communist parties operating in the United States under the following names:

- Revolutionary Communist Party (Maoist)

- Communist Party USA (Paleo-Marxist)

- Workers World (Juche)

- Socialist Workers Party (Pathfinder)

- Socialist Party USA (Trotskyist)

- Party of Socialism and Liberation (?)

I've never heard of an extant group called the Progressive Party. I bing-dot-commed for their website but couldn't find it.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

is what PS probably means by "progressives."


Yup. Before peeps start flippin out, yes, I know that the Progressive Party of today is no longer


Does the Progressive Party have a website? Could you post the URL so we can visit it? It might help to eradicate some of the skepticism you're facing as to whether a national political party called "Progressive Party" exists.


Okay, I should not have used the word party. But, my choice of words do not change the similarities in the polices of Progressives and Communism or any other theories or philosophies based on or attributed to Marx.

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/
Progressive Caucus, in the Democrat party. I think there are roughly 78-81 members in the House


Barack Obama was never a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus when he was in Congress.
ImageImage
User avatar
Corporal saxitoxin
 
Posts: 11995
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:01 am

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby Phatscotty on Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:54 am

This message is only for the people who voted that Obama is a Marxist. If you voted Obama is not a Marxist,
read no further!!!!!
show
User avatar
Major Phatscotty
 
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm

Re: Is Obama a Marxist?

Postby saxitoxin on Sat Aug 18, 2012 2:15 am

In 1978, Gen. Leigh, Vice-Chairman of the Chilean military junta, resigned in protest over a disagreement in the economic policies of Gen. Pinochet. Pinochet, at the time, was moving forward with mass privatization of the Chilean economy. Gen. Leigh supported total state control.

The point being, Leigh was an avowed anti-Marxist and his anti-Marxist credentials can't be questioned. He had one of his eyes shot out of its socket in an assassination attempt by the Manuel Rodriguez Movement. After the coup against Allende he personally oversaw the execution of 200 members of Popular Unity and called Castro a dictator. But he opposed economic privatization. Marxism is a very specific way of looking at the world - not whether you support a 25% or 35% marginal tax rate or if you oppose or support amending sub-section whatever of appendix X of the SEC consolidated omnibus bill of 197something.

    Obama is a book club leftist who spent university chattering about Rosa Luxemburg over cappuccinos because it fed some prissy intellectual void in his mind, then he got old and cynical - figured the big house in Hyde Park and the Lexus was better than his 5-minute youthful dream of tromping through a Bolivian cocoa field with Che - realized the money train was about to pull into his station and stapled a "For Sale Rent" sign to his forehead. A communist revolution would mean the end of Goldman Sachs. Goldman-Sachs wouldn't give millions to Obama if he were plotting to have their directors hanged from lamp posts on Broad Street.
ImageImage
User avatar
Corporal saxitoxin
 
Posts: 11995
Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 1:01 am

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron