t wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2008 19:20:15 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:
I love personal attacks ... they demonstrate the vacuity of the
speaker's position.
I note that, as it was with the previous posting, you do not respond
argument per argument but with a turn of phrase.
That truly demonstrates a position that has been given up.
Be an honorable man, Tim, and respond point by point.
tom watson
Marx favored the collective as an economic and social mechanism as a
theoretical and intellectual matter.
Lenin gave it legs.
Obama is a collectivist in every sense of the word. He too wants to
give Marxist ideals legs almost two decades after we swatted it to
death elsewhere. He believes in the interest of the collective over
the group. He is willing to collectivize significant aspects of the
American landscape, starting with healthcare. He's already gone on
record in support of the currently-underway collectivization of US
banking (he is not alone in this, but this doesn't make him a saint).
He is willing to use the force of government to move wealth from those
who have earned it to those who have not. He fundamentally believes in
he right of government to intrude in all aspects of the private sector
to dictate how companies should hire and fire and with whom and on
what terms business is to be conduct.
If he were even slightly honest, Obama would acknowledge his radical
progressive/liberal roots and admit that, at his core, he absolutely
embraces "From each according to his abilities, to each according to
their needs".
Is he overtly/declaratively a Marxist? No, only because he is either
dishonest or stupid... and I don't think he's stupid. He comes from
a community of radical collectivists, sings their tune, and dances
their dance. When you live in a sewer you come out smelling like
feces. The Obama camp reeks.
BTW, my honor is not in question. Your integrity is. I defend
letting people alone, not interfering in their lives, money,
or practices except when they demonstrate fraud, force, or threat.
This is a pretty honorable position. You, OTOH, wring you hands in
fear and loathing that free people should actually be allowed to
be free. You defend one of the most evident political scoundrels
of the past 20 years. You defend intervention in the private
sector by government force because its suits your gooey social and
political agenda. But you're never quite honest enough to admit
that this is all conducted under threat of force - the force of
government making it so. I want a free country - that means
leaving *everyone* alone to do as they wish up to the limits of
fraud/force/threat. You want a country where you and your
gang of social engineers can use the thugs in government to jam
your agenda down everyone's throat... Yeah, it's my honor that's
the problem ...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/