McCain scolds GOP for whacking Obama

ludahai · Dec 23, 2008

obvious Child said:
I've long said that a socially moderate but fiscally conservative party in the image of Goldwater would totally annihilate the Democrats. Few seem to listen though.

I am in complete agreement, though while I am not FAR right on social issues, I do adhere to traditional religious values, but those same religious values tell me that people who are less fortunate SHOULD receive assistance.

obvious Child · Dec 23, 2008

JMak said:
I'm not sure what I was wrong about.

Everything? Oh wait, that's not news.

Good job at completely neutering what it is that socialism is.

You mean your twisted definition of what socialism is. Not my problem.

Um, I learned this long ago.

Clearly. You just now redefine it so that you can call communally owned goods that provide services and goods for taxpayers equally isn't socialism when you like what that good/service is. :rofl

I also learned long ago that people often twist whatever is they have to make their point more convenient.

See above. You are saying that communal owned services and goods provided for the citizens equally paid for by citizen taxation isn't Socialism.

I have. How does national defense and public safety as provided here in the US make the US a socialist nation?

Every country is socialist in some regard. I never argued that national defense and public safety made us on those grounds Socialist. I said they were socialist services.

I love how you argue that communally owned goods that are provided equally for all taxpayers funded by taxation is not Socialism. Only because you like those services and goods!

JMak · Dec 23, 2008

obvious Child said:
Everything? Oh wait, that's not news.

The first time you...oh, forget it.

You mean your twisted definition of what socialism is. Not my problem.

No, I mean your inability to even properly discuss socialism.

Clearly. You just now redefine it so that you can call communally owned goods that provide services and goods for taxpayers equally isn't socialism when you like what that good/service is. :rofl

Ha. It ain't socialism except if you completely neuter the meaning of socialism to include anything and everything provided by government.

See above. You are saying that communal owned services and goods provided for the citizens equally paid for by citizen taxation isn't Socialism.

It ain't.

Every country is socialist in some regard. I never argued that national defense and public safety made us on those grounds Socialist. I said they were socialist services.

They are not socialist services. This is what I meant when I said above that you cannot even properly discuss socialism. Socialism ain't a government providing national defense or public safety. These are legitimate government functions. Your logic would effectively neuter socialism and it's importance as an organizing and governmental principle.

I love how you argue that communally owned goods that are provided equally for all taxpayers funded by taxation is not Socialism. Only because you like those services and goods!

Yeah, that's my argument.

Give me your PayPal account, I'll flip you a quarter so you can buy a clue.

obvious Child · Dec 24, 2008

JMak said:
No, I mean your inability to even properly discuss socialism.

Incorrect. You don't like my inability to discuss socialism how you want to discuss it rather then what it actually is.

Ha. It ain't socialism except if you completely neuter the meaning of socialism to include anything and everything provided by government.

How much does a ticket on the fail train cost JMak? When government provides a good equally to all citizens is that the same as providing a good specifically to some groups and not to others? That would remove your claim right there. I never included that. You did. Which makes you dishonest in your assertion about my position (guess, what your favorite phrase is coming soon!).

It ain't.

"Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods"

Huh. Let's see. The highway system, police, firefighters and military are collectively owned and administrated by the government and the means of production and usage is also administrated by the government.

They are not socialist services.

So communally owned services that are administrated by the government to provide equally for all citizens isn't a socialist service?

Who's the one who can't define it? You. That's who.

Socialism ain't a government providing national defense or public safety. These are legitimate government functions.

GOOD JOB. You're finally realizing that legitimate government functions include providing some aspect of socialism.

Yeah, that's my argument.

Pretty much. Military, police and firefighters are all services dictated and owned by the government (and therefore the people in this country) and provide services equally for all its citizens.

Let's look at that key part of the definition again:

"advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods"

1) State ownership. Check
2) Administration by state of production and distribution. Check
3) Equal providing of services. Check.

Care to get off the fail train Jmak?

McCain scolds GOP for whacking Obama

ludahai

Defender of the Faith

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater

JMak

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater