• 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!

[W:168]Cortez releases her communist agenda

AOC Derangement. She is a right winger’s wet dream. And she can dance.

That makes left wingers nervous, doesnt it? Having open socialists on their side? Same as having religious zealots or supremacists claiming the right. Extremists that everyone hates are bad for the parties image.
 
That makes left wingers nervous, doesnt it? Having open socialists on their side? Same as having religious zealots or supremacists claiming the right. Extremists that everyone hates are bad for the parties image.

Not nervous at all. To paraphrase Will Rogers, (“we are all ignorant, except on different subjects”) we are all socialists, except on different subjects. We started with anti-trust and national parks, then Social Security, then Medicare, prescription drugs, now the ACA. “Creeping socialism” is a phrase that went out of style in the 1960s. Adam Smith met Norman Thomas years ago. They get along fine.
 
Not nervous at all. To paraphrase Will Rogers, (“we are all ignorant, except on different subjects”) we are all socialists, except on different subjects. We started with anti-trust and national parks, then Social Security, then Medicare, prescription drugs, now the ACA. “Creeping socialism” is a phrase that went out of style in the 1960s. Adam Smith met Norman Thomas years ago. They get along fine.

I beg to differ. I certainly am not a socialist. I have no interest in any of those wealth redistribution programs, nor in govt control of economics other than standards and justice. The question is more a political one though. And I think democrat partisans are certainly not happy with the word socialism being associated with them, even though thats what they are. Hence the term progressive, or even "democratic socialism".
 
I beg to differ. I certainly am not a socialist. I have no interest in any of those wealth redistribution programs, nor in govt control of economics other than standards and justice. The question is more a political one though. And I think democrat partisans are certainly not happy with the word socialism being associated with them, even though thats what they are. Hence the term progressive, or even "democratic socialism".

“Democratic socialism” has been a term for decades. Nothing new for the left. Fine for you not to have an interest in 20th century reforms like union protection, SS, Medicare, unemployment insurance, etc. They have saved weaker mortals like my parents and me, and without them we might have had a revolution.

When it came time, even Ayn Rand accepted Social Security.
 
“Democratic socialism” has been a term for decades. Nothing new for the left. Fine for you not to have an interest in 20th century reforms like union protection, SS, Medicare, unemployment insurance, etc. They have saved weaker mortals like my parents and me, and without them we might have had a revolution.

When it came time, even Ayn Rand accepted Social Security.

Why not? Its her money. What capitalist wouldnt take money they were owed? However, all those govt dependency programs did was make people dependent on govt. Hows that working out for our culture?
 
That makes left wingers nervous, doesnt it? Having open socialists on their side? Same as having religious zealots or supremacists claiming the right. Extremists that everyone hates are bad for the parties image.

‘We could be more like Sweden’ is not an extremist position.

”Everyone” does not hate her. You do.
 
Why not? Its her money. What capitalist wouldnt take money they were owed? However, all those govt dependency programs did was make people dependent on govt. Hows that working out for our culture?

Seems to be working fine for us and about all the developed world. Poverty among the elderly reduced, for example. We all depend on the government in one way or another. That’s the meaning of society. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t kick tails of people who abuse government services, but on balance we are better off.

As for Ayn, she, like me may have gotten more from Social Security than she put in. It’s an insurance program after all, so she may have benefitted from other people’s money.
 
That makes left wingers nervous, doesnt it? Having open socialists on their side? Same as having religious zealots or supremacists claiming the right. Extremists that everyone hates are bad for the parties image.

Except she's not exactly the second coming of Mao, unless viewed through the eyes of some moron Republicans.
 
Seems to be working fine for us and about all the developed world. Poverty among the elderly reduced, for example. We all depend on the government in one way or another. That’s the meaning of society. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t kick tails of people who abuse government services, but on balance we are better off.

As for Ayn, she, like me may have gotten more from Social Security than she put in. It’s an insurance program after all, so she may have benefitted from other people’s money.

The govt took her money, by force. So it makes sense should get it back. With interest. She could have done far with that money as SS has a very low return. But yeah sure, all the takers are doing fine. They dont have to do anything, to get other peoples money. Meawhile, nearly 50% of my earnings are taken and given to others. And it encourages people to be slackers. It has eroded our freedom, which is the worst thing of all.
 
The govt took her money, by force. So it makes sense should get it back. With interest. She could have done far with that money as SS has a very low return. But yeah sure, all the takers are doing fine. They dont have to do anything, to get other peoples money. Meawhile, nearly 50% of my earnings are taken and given to others. And it encourages people to be slackers. It has eroded our freedom, which is the worst thing of all.

The government takes my money by force every time I buy gas.

Who are the "others" who get 50% of your money? If it's me on SS and Medicare, thanks. Our military thanks you as well. Why do you think all the developed countries in the world have programs similar to what exists in the US, only more generous ones? Slackers are the price we pay for preventing hunger, just as overly expensive military equipment is the price we pay for having a defense department. That calls for reform ran than abolition of either the welfare state or the military, trying to keep fraud at a minimum, and in my view, creating jobs, even "make work" ones for those on welfare who are able bodied. Check general assistance payments in your area. Would you be better off on that or paying the taxes you do? I am more, not less free because the government pays part of my considerable medical bills with Medicare, and gives me a tax break so that I can itemize the costs of my supplemental insurance. A friend of mine is paralyzed, having been shot by an unknown assailant. Would you or Ayn begrudge what he gets from SS disability?

We are part of a society, from socius in Latin, meaning comrade (gasp!), friend or ally. We took a left turn around Teddy Roosevelt's time, and for better or worse haven't looked back. Just look at GOP efforts to get rid of Obamacare: their rhetoric is *replace*, not just repeal.

We might be better in Ayn Rand's quasi-fascist world, but I suspect she will be looked on as someone who did the impossible, overreacting to Lenin and Stalin.
 
Last edited:
Seems to be working fine for us and about all the developed world. Poverty among the elderly reduced, for example. We all depend on the government in one way or another. That’s the meaning of society. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t kick tails of people who abuse government services, but on balance we are better off.

As for Ayn, she, like me may have gotten more from Social Security than she put in. It’s an insurance program after all, so she may have benefitted from other people’s money.
Strange how no one ever tried Ayns system.
 
Who are the "others" who get 50% of your money? If it's me on SS and Medicare, thanks. Our military thanks you as well. Why do you think all the developed countries in the world have programs similar to what exists in the US, only more generous ones? Slackers are the price we pay for preventing hunger, just as overly expensive military equipment is the price we pay for having a defense department. That calls for reform ran than abolition of either the welfare state or the military, trying to keep fraud at a minimum. But I am more, not less free because the government pays part of my considerable medical bills with Medicare, and gives me a tax break so that I can itemize the costs of my supplemental insurance. We are part of a society, from socius in Latin, meaning comrade, friend or ally. We took a left turn around Teddy Roosevelt's time, and for better or worse haven't looked back. Just look at GOP efforts to get rid of Obamacare: their rhetoric is *replace*, not just repeal.

We might be better in Ayn Rand's quasi-fascist world, but I suspect she will be looked on as someone who did the impossible, overreacting to Lenin and Stalin.
Don't confuse our trumpies with Latin.
They may even learn the def of liberal.
 
Who are the "others" who get 50% of your money? If it's me on SS and Medicare, thanks. Our military thanks you as well. Why do you think all the developed countries in the world have programs similar to what exists in the US, only more generous ones? Slackers are the price we pay for preventing hunger, just as overly expensive military equipment is the price we pay for having a defense department. That calls for reform ran than abolition of either the welfare state or the military, trying to keep fraud at a minimum. But I am more, not less free because the government pays part of my considerable medical bills with Medicare, and gives me a tax break so that I can itemize the costs of my supplemental insurance. We are part of a society, from socius in Latin, meaning comrade, friend or ally. We took a left turn around Teddy Roosevelt's time, and for better or worse haven't looked back. Just look at GOP efforts to get rid of Obamacare: their rhetoric is *replace*, not just repeal.

We might be better in Ayn Rand's quasi-fascist world, but I suspect she will be looked on as someone who did the impossible, overreacting to Lenin and Stalin.

People take out 40% more than they ever put in
 
Cortez is the Fox news and their mindless minions new 'bogeyman/woman'.. Expect this for the next 2 years, at least. They were attacking her BEFORE she was even in Congress... lol

But this is the new Republican party, they don't lead, they don't govern... They only hate, and a minority woman who is a Democrat? That's a lot of hate, it's probably orgasmic for them.

But this is the new Democratic Party, they don't lead, they don't govern... They only hate, and a white man who is a Republican? Thats a lot of hate, its probably orgasmic for them.
 
But this is the new Democratic Party, they don't lead, they don't govern... They only hate, and a white man who is a Republican? Thats a lot of hate, its probably orgasmic for them.

Because over the last two years the Republican party has had complete control over the government, not only is your post not original, but it's untrue. You can't govern if you don't have the government and the Republicans have, but the Democrats haven't..
 
Because over the last two years the Republican party has had complete control over the government, not only is your post not original, but it's untrue. You can't govern if you don't have the government and the Republicans have, but the Democrats haven't..

Democrats did for 8 years, ya dingus
 
Democrats did for 8 years, ya dingus

The Dems had the whole government for 8 years.? Don't call other people names if you don't know what the hell you're talking about. The GOP was going to repeal and replace or improve ACA they didn't do it. They had 2 years to build Trump's Monument of a wall. They didn't do it. All they've done for 2 years was divide the country more and spew hate about immigrants. That's not governing.

Have a nice day
 
Cortez is the Fox news and their mindless minions new 'bogeyman/woman'.. Expect this for the next 2 years, at least. They were attacking her BEFORE she was even in Congress... lol

But this is the new Republican party, they don't lead, they don't govern... They only hate, and a minority woman who is a Democrat? That's a lot of hate, it's probably orgasmic for them.

I don't think it's orgasmic. I think it's more of a mommy issues kind of thing.
 
I really don’t understand why the right is so fixated on her. She is a freshman congresswoman who is going to be marginalized by Dem leadership, like Pelosi, and she is too young to run for President. I have been hearing a lot about her but it is the right wing who I keep hearing about her from. It seems there are other Democratic women they should be more concerned about, like Pelosi and Warren. Though I am sure AOC appreciates the press.


One word: DESPERATION!
 
I dont hate her. But by everyone I obviously meant the party leaders.

I, for one, don't particularly care for those folks.
 
Back
Top Bottom