• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rep. Allen West Says Up To 81 House Members Are Communists

Henrin said:
You think that works for what they started? One thing on that list qualifies the rest fails horribly.

Calling it a mixed economy is a reach and you know it.
Click to expand...

Actually many things on the list of things qualify. I don't have to revise history to fit my ideology.
 
Redress said:
Actually many things on the list of things qualify. I don't have to revise history to fit my ideology.
Click to expand...

I recounted and there is 1 and a half things on that list that count.

I guess if you want to have fun with the term and think that 1 and half things makes it a mixed economy when the meat of the idea is completely left out, go right ahead.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
Mixed economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So history is not your only weak subject.
Click to expand...

Mixed economy is an economic system in which both the state and private sector direct the economy, reflecting characteristics of both market economies and planned economies.
Mixed economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't agree with the concept that merely having the government own resources, and having any regulation at all, indicates a planned economy.

I would not look at a completely free-market system, and claim "THIS IS A PLANNED ECONOMY!" because the government owns the Federal building.

Really? Owning the White House, is government owning a resource. Does that mean it's a planned economy? I don't think you can rationally make that case.

Nor does regulation inherently mean a planned economy. There are two very different types of regulations. Establishing ownership of a car through regulation of registration, is not a planned economy. Those regulations don't not hinder, direct, control, or change the direction of the free-market system. They merely establish a system of ownership.

This is good. It's part of the Capitalist system, of protecting peoples rights of property.

Point being, it's still not an example of a "planned economy" which makes it a mixed economy.

That said, I do believe that there were some aspects of a planned economy early.... not at the start, but early in our nations history. And I would argue that the evidence shows the planned aspects didn't work then, as they still don't today.
 
StillBallin75 said:
The point remains that just because progressive taxation is a pillar of communism (a debatable point to begin with), doesn't mean that progressive taxation is inherently or uniquely socialist. I think that was the takeaway.
Click to expand...

Can I use this as my signature? :lamo
 
StillBallin75 said:
The point remains that just because progressive taxation is a pillar of communism (a debatable point to begin with)
Click to expand...

No, it isn't debatable at all. If you understand Karl Marx at all, and or, have read the Communist Manefesto, I'd need you to show me where I am wrong on this. Here they are again...

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]1. Abolition of private property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=+1] 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
[/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1] 3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
The Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx

Now you can deny all you want, but it is right there for you to read.

doesn't mean that progressive taxation is inherently or uniquely socialist. I think that was the takeaway.
Click to expand...


Then the "takeaway" is dead wrong.


j-mac
 
If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, and looks like a duck ........ Allen West is merely pointing out the obvious.
 
Eighty Deuce said:
If it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, and looks like a duck ........ Allen West is merely pointing out the obvious.
Click to expand...

Then he should man up and name names.
 
j-mac said:
No, it isn't debatable at all. If you understand Karl Marx at all, and or, have read the Communist Manefesto, I'd need you to show me where I am wrong on this. Here they are again...

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]1. Abolition of private property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[SIZE=+1] 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
[/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1] 3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica]4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=+1]10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.
[/SIZE][/FONT]
The Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx

Now you can deny all you want, but it is right there for you to read.




Then the "takeaway" is dead wrong.


j-mac
Click to expand...
Not sure you understand, just because an idea is espoused by a deviant group, does not make it an inherently evil idea. In your above list, an equal obligation for all to work is one of the "pillars of communism" it just so happens to be an idea that has been sponsored by conservatives for decades and remains popular even to this day. The fact that the idea was also sponsored by communists doesn't make it any less noble, nor does it make it a "communist idea."
 
Last edited:
sharon said:
Then he should man up and name names.
Click to expand...

That's what the Democrats wanted McCarthy to do as well, and much against his better judgment. He wanted a Senate committee to quiely investigate. Of course we now know that there were Communists who had infiltrated the American government at the highest levels.

What good do you think it would do by naming these people?
 
Allen West is an idiot.

That anyone takes what he says seriously is scary.
 
Grant said:
That's what the Democrats wanted McCarthy to do as well, and much against his better judgment. He wanted a Senate committee to quiely investigate. Of course we now know that there were Communists who had infiltrated the American government at the highest levels.

What good do you think it would do by naming these people?
Click to expand...
Perhaps to establish some credibility and ensure us that he isn't talking out of his ***, although it'd be pretty hard to convince objective people otherwise at this point given his history of spouting off absolute nonsense at a furious rate.
 
Hare said:
Perhaps to establish some credibility and ensure us that he isn't talking out of his ***, although it'd be pretty hard to convince objective people otherwise at this point given his history of spouting off absolute nonsense at a furious rate.
Click to expand...

Oh I think there is little doubt that it is rectum reveille that he is playing.
 
Hare said:
Not sure you understand, just because an idea is espoused by a deviant group, does not make it an inherently evil idea. In your above list, an equal obligation for all to work is one of the "pillars of communism" it just so happens to be an idea that has been sponsored by conservatives for decades and remains popular even to this day. The fact that the idea was also sponsored by communists doesn't make it any less noble, nor does it make it a "communist idea."
Click to expand...

Perhaps all or some of these ideas are quite innocent and worthy of discussion but what was evil, and remains evil, was the forced implementation of these ideas.

You'll notice that some of these ideas have already been implemented to varying degrees but there was, as in the health care act, little public input. In fact, in the latter case, it is against public will.
 
Parrish said:
Allen West is an idiot.

That anyone takes what he says seriously is scary.
Click to expand...

Yes, that''s the common mantra of leftists. Deny, deny, deny. We've been through this before. Nothing has changed.
 
Hare said:
Not sure you understand, just because an idea is espoused by a deviant group, does not make it an inherently evil idea. In your above list, an equal obligation for all to work is one of the "pillars of communism" it just so happens to be an idea that has been sponsored by conservatives for decades and remains popular even to this day. The fact that the idea was also sponsored by communists doesn't make it any less noble, nor does it make it a "communist idea."
Click to expand...


Understood, however when you couple these together with their other 'pillars', or 'planks' such as, abolition of private property then you have a slave to the state, not an individual working for a free dream.


j-mac
 
Hare said:
Perhaps to establish some credibility and ensure us that he isn't talking out of his ***, although it'd be pretty hard to convince objective people otherwise at this point given his history of spouting off absolute nonsense at a furious rate.
Click to expand...

And ruin many careers in the process? Why?

His charges should be investigated by a special committee to see if there is any truth to them. Then after an extensive investigation the results should be made public.

Allen West might well suffer the consequences by making false statements or some of these people might well be of the far left. But there is no point in damaging people's reputations in order to see whether Allen West is telling the truth or not. We should have learned that by now.
 
Grant said:
And ruin many careers in the process? Why?

His charges should be investigated by a special committee to see if there is any truth to them. Then after an extensive investigation the results should be made public.

Allen West might well suffer the consequences by making false statements or some of these people might well be of the far left. But there is no point in damaging people's reputations in order to see whether Allen West is telling the truth or not. We should have learned that by now.
Click to expand...
Because Communists are evil correct?

Sounds like a rebirth of the Mccarthy era to me.

The only reputation he's damaged is his own, perhaps Mr West should avoid making such idiotic claims in the future to avoid any future embarrassment.
 
Hare said:
Perhaps to establish some credibility and ensure us that he isn't talking out of his ***, although it'd be pretty hard to convince objective people otherwise at this point given his history of spouting off absolute nonsense at a furious rate.
Click to expand...

So, just so I have this straight, when you have members like Maxine Waters sitting on a committee grilling oil execs, and getting flustered enough to blurt out that "What this democrat is all about is nationalizing....er....um...taking over and running your companies for you".... When you hear Senators like Bernie Sanders openly espouse the tennants of Marxism, and indeed say that he is a socialist, then this is what? talking out of their ass?

Look, taking from an old Seinfeld episode about Communism, they were ordering Chinese food, and the restraint wouldn't deliver to Elaine because she "Named names!"

This is what Marxists, and in the modern culture like ours, Alinsky'ites demand so that they can discredit those naming the names, or quickly changing the path that these "communists" within take.

There was an interview of a former KGB agent from the 60s that was tasked with infiltrating the movements in the US and pushing communist ideals, and ideas, (Can't remember the name) but I do remember him talking about how, it was beyond the wildest dreams of the Kremlin how these student groups, agitation groups, and radicals within took the ball and went beyond the wildest dreams of the leaders in Moscow.

These are the folks now driving policy in this country, and kid yourself if you wish, but there is an agenda behind them.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
So, just so I have this straight, when you have members like Maxine Waters sitting on a committee grilling oil execs, and getting flustered enough to blurt out that "What this democrat is all about is nationalizing....er....um...taking over and running your companies for you".... When you hear Senators like Bernie Sanders openly espouse the tennants of Marxism, and indeed say that he is a socialist, then this is what? talking out of their ass?

Look, taking from an old Seinfeld episode about Communism, they were ordering Chinese food, and the restraint wouldn't deliver to Elaine because she "Named names!"

This is what Marxists, and in the modern culture like ours, Alinsky'ites demand so that they can discredit those naming the names, or quickly changing the path that these "communists" within take.

There was an interview of a former KGB agent from the 60s that was tasked with infiltrating the movements in the US and pushing communist ideals, and ideas, (Can't remember the name) but I do remember him talking about how, it was beyond the wildest dreams of the Kremlin how these student groups, agitation groups, and radicals within took the ball and went beyond the wildest dreams of the leaders in Moscow.

These are the folks now driving policy in this country, and kid yourself if you wish, but there is an agenda behind them.

j-mac
Click to expand...
So you've named 1 self described socialist, and one misspeak from a notoriously unintelligent congresswomen. Ok I'll give you the benefit of the doubt with Waters even though somehow I sincerely doubt she's a communist. That's 2 down 79 to go.
 
Hare said:
So you've named 1 self described socialist, and one misspeak from a notoriously unintelligent congresswomen. Ok I'll give you the benefit of the doubt with Waters even though somehow I sincerely doubt she's a communist. That's 2 down 79 to go.
Click to expand...

Thank you for proving my point.


j-mac
 
Hare said:
And what would this point be?
Click to expand...

Please go back and re read post 443, and then take a look at what I highlighted in 445, and I think if you're being honest you'll understand.


j-mac
 
I can't believe that there are 45 pages worth of idiotic posts still trying to defend the patently insane statement by Rep. West. :2rofll:
 
j-mac said:
Please go back and re read post 443, and then take a look at what I highlighted in 445, and I think if you're being honest you'll understand.


j-mac
Click to expand...
I claimed that West was speaking out his behind when he claimed that up to 81 members of the house were communists, you gave me 2 examples (2 is being extremely generous) and claimed that you had proven some sort of point. What would that point be?
 
Hare said:
I claimed that West was speaking out his behind when he claimed that up to 81 members of the house were communists, you gave me 2 examples (2 is being extremely generous) and claimed that you had proven some sort of point. What would that point be?
Click to expand...

The point is that in today's political atmosphere in DC, it is not only possible that members of our congress, and Senate are holding beliefs that align with communist ideals, but probable. We have a culture of finger pointing, and ad hom in place of defending policy. Thank demo's in charge now for that one.

Both sides are now doing that, however, don't for one second think that it isn't clear to a majority of people in this country who is actually doing the dividing to mask their failures....That is what will be Obama's real legacy in being a one termer.


j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom