Thread: Gingrich Virginia FAIL

Originally Posted by SteveFoerster

Fair enough, although I for one do not believe either that Gingrich is really conservative or that Obama is Marxist. It's all posturing.

I agree. Gingrich is just being a politician. He has to play the conservative to win the primaries.

Obama is nowhere near a Marxist. And, in case anyone wants to throw out "Obamacare," let's recall that the health reform forces individuals to buy a product from private businesses.

Originally Posted by SteveFoerster

Then why falsely portray him as the inevitable nominee?

In the hope of using Chicken Little hyperbole to make him not be the nominee....."The presumptive nominee is a heartless vulture capitalist!!!"

Originally Posted by SteveFoerster

Fair enough, although I for one do not believe either that Gingrich is really conservative or that Obama is Marxist. It's all posturing.

Oh, Gingrich is conservative on *most* issues, and Obama is most definitely a Marxist.

Originally Posted by StefanM

Obama is nowhere near a Marxist.

No?

Obama Civilian Security - YouTube

Sound familiar? It should;

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERsa.htm

Originally Posted by Bruce

Oh, Gingrich is conservative on *most* issues, and Obama is most definitely a Marxist.

No?

Obama Civilian Security - YouTube

Sound familiar? It should;

Sturm Abteilung (SA)

You do know that Nazis were fascists, not Marxists, right? Nazis hated Marxists.

Also "National Socialism" does not equal "Socialism" anymore than "People's Republic of China" equals a true republic.

They're all corporatists. Their policies seem different only because their patrons differ.

Originally Posted by StefanM

You do know that Nazis were fascists, not Marxists, right? Nazis hated Marxists.

Also "National Socialism" does not equal "Socialism" anymore than "People's Republic of China" equals a true republic.

They're both (Fascists and Marxists) extremists who believe in government control and regulation over every aspect of people's lives, which fits our current President's philosophy quite well.

The only real difference between the Nazis and the Soviets was that the Nazis had better-looking uniforms.

Originally Posted by SteveFoerster

They're all corporatists. Their policies seem different only because their patrons differ.

I disagree and agree at the same time, they are all corporatists in that they all pander to certain large donor organizations, but as for Obama, he is clearly anti-business as a whole. He vilifies profit, does not grasp the concept of reward vs. risk, does not respect private property and really plays a hard game of class-ism. Either that or he simply does not understand the marketplace at all in his policy making.

In pure free market terms Ron Paul is the best bet since he'd allow the markets to determine their own fate (hopefully short of nixing anti-trust policy). Although RP is seriously flawed in monetary policy...but his intentions are good (as in the interest of the public and not the government or corporations).

Romney has the potential to be a good president. At the very least the man is pragmatic...something that cannot be said for a bombastic Newt. I know nothing of Santorum and honestly cannot bring myself to find out much since I do not consider him to have even a snow ball's chance. I really believe it will come down to Romney or Newt and even though I do not consider Romney much of a conservative (he is not) neither is Newt and at least Romney can be counted on doing what is best for Romney. Newt is about as predictable as the weather.