Saunterells confusion

[subdjoe]

"Which questions have I not answered directly? Sometimes it is hard to keep up when I'm being bombarded on all sides. "

Latest example of that is your spin when called on Ameican imperialism. I'm not going to dig through each thread to find all the examples. Just look at how many times you have been asked to please answer the question that had been asked in a previous post.

"My opinions are my own and I back them up with reports from objective sources whenever possible. '

Your sources are about as objective as Ann Coulter. While I find her sometimes amusing, I would hardly call her objective. when your link takes us to something like XYZ, the voice of the progressive movement (I don't remember the name or the exact wording), any reasonably intellegent person is going to know that there is a strong bias built in. And, yes, right wing sites have a bias too. That is why it is good to use many sources.


"As far as my general attitude, I think I am pretty cordial. Let's see, I've been called a liar, an idiot, a socialist, a fool, and worse. I have never called anyone names here except for telling someone they must be crazy if they believe that. "

To me you seem smugly self satisfied and project that everyone who disagrees with you has an IQ of about 10. Your words and evasions, the politicians your support, the biased, single sided sources that you use, are what prompt people to call you those things. If you support socialist politicians, then it is reasonable for people to think you are a socialist. If you fall for the lies of those politican, and pass them on as truth, then the labels of liar, idiot, and fool also seem to be reasonable assumptions. Throw in your double standards, your seeming lack of both history and how to apply it lessons to the present, and you have the perfect parrot for the american hating, one world government, home grown socialist. "Lick-spittle lacky of the running dog socialists" is a phrase that jumps to mind.

"Point is, I'm not going to be this board's Alan Colmes who just sits there like a fool while outrageous comments are being made."

Yet you seem to expect the rest of us to do just that - sit still and allow your outrageous comments to go unchallenged. Didn't I say something about you using a double standard?

[saunterelle]

I take issue with every one of your points. I'll address a couple:


"To me you seem smugly self satisfied and project that everyone who disagrees with you has an IQ of about 10. Your words and evasions, the politicians your support, the biased, single sided sources that you use, are what prompt people to call you those things. If you support socialist politicians, then it is reasonable for people to think you are a socialist. If you fall for the lies of those politican, and pass them on as truth, then the labels of liar, idiot, and fool also seem to be reasonable assumptions. Throw in your double standards, your seeming lack of both history and how to apply it lessons to the present, and you have the perfect parrot for the american hating, one world government, home grown socialist. "Lick-spittle lacky of the running dog socialists" is a phrase that jumps to mind. "

Now, to me, you have just described George W. Bush to a T with "smugly self satisfied and project that everyone who disagrees with you has an IQ of about 10." First off, Obama is the only one I've supported here and he is nowhere near a socialist. He is all for continuing the systems of Democracy and Capitalism that exists in our country, therefore it is incorrect to call him a socialist. You may not agree with his social programs but it is a far cry from true socialism. You don't find me calling posters here, or Bush, a "fascist" even though some of those tendencies are on display.

"Yet you seem to expect the rest of us to do just that - sit still and allow your outrageous comments to go unchallenged. Didn't I say something about you using a double standard?"

No, I welcome every challenge to what I write here. That's what this board is all about isn't it? I respect the passion that you and others have shown by quickly responding to my posts with thought-out responses. I just get tired of the same old fear mongering like calling Obama a socialist and attacking his name, I mean come on!

[subdjoe]

Good lord! You had to take a cheap shot at Bush, eh? And what does Bush have to do with this? As far as Barry not being a socialist - tell us another. Have you bothered to READ what he has written, not just scan his press releases and website? Have you bothered to look at his record?

Fear mongering? This from the supporter of the candidate of the party whos whole message is fear and division. He famous, over hyped speech was all about fear and division.
I will agree that making fun of a name doesn't make any sense, but it has a long tradition in American politics.

Good post by the way.

[ferrous]

Jun 6, 2008 15:41:52 GMT -5 saunterelle said:

First off, Obama is the only one I've supported here and he is nowhere near a socialist. He is all for continuing the systems of Democracy and Capitalism that exists in our country, therefore it is incorrect to call him a socialist. You may not agree with his social programs but it is a far cry from true socialism.

Yes, I'd say saunterelle is a bit confused.

His definition of socialism seems lacking.

When Sen. Obama is refferd to as a Progressive or Socialist, the more corect term should be Democratic Socialist.

["In contrast, in other definitions, democratic socialism simply refers to all forms of socialism that follow an electoral, reformist or evolutionary path to socialism, rather than a revolutionary one."]

[""The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. DSA's members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics."]

In other words Progressive is just another word for Socialist.
____________________________

You Might Be a Progressive If …

• You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creating a non-profit national health care service.

• You think that human rights ought always to trump property rights.

• You think U.S. military spending is an obscene waste of resources, and that the only freedom this spending protects is the freedom of economic elites to exploit working people all around the planet.

• You think U.S. troops should be brought home not only from Afghanistan and Iraq, but from all 130 countries in which the U.S. has military bases.

• You think political leaders who engage in “preemptive war” and invasions should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and judged against the standards of international law established at Nuremberg after World War Two.

• You think public education should be free, not just from kindergarten through high school, but as far as a person is willing and able to go.

• You think that electoral reform should include instant run-off voting, publicly-financed elections, easy ballot access for all parties, and proportional representation.

• You think that electoral democracy is not enough, and that democracy must also be participatory and extend to workplaces.

• You think that strengthening the rights of all workers to unionize and bargain collectively is a useful step toward full economic democracy.

• You think that as a society we have a collective obligation to provide everyone who is willing and able to work with a job that pays a living wage and offers dignity.

• You think that a class system which forces some people to do dirty, dangerous, boring work all the time, while others get to do clean, safe, interesting work all the time, can never deliver social justice.

• You think that regulating big corporations isn’t enough, and that such corporations, if they are allowed to exist at all, must either serve the common good or be put into public receivership.

• You think that the legal doctrine granting corporations the same constitutional rights as natural persons is absurd and must be overturned.

• You think it’s wrong to allow individuals to accumulate wealth without limits, and that the highest incomes should be capped well before they begin to threaten community and democracy.

• You think that wealth, not just income, should be taxed.

• You think it’s crazy to use the Old Testament as a policy guide for the 21st century.

• You believe in celebrating diversity, while also recognizing that having women and people of color proportionately represented among the class of oppressors is not the goal we should be aiming for.

• You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy.

• You think that anyone who desires the reins of power that come with high political office should, by reason of that desire, be seen as unfit for the job.

• You think that instead of more leaders, we need fewer followers.

• You think that national borders, while sometimes establishing territories of safety, more often establish territories of exploitation, much like gang turf.

• You are open to considering how the privileges you enjoy because of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and/or physical ability might come at the expense of others.

• You believe that voting every few years is a weak form of political participation, and that achieving social justice requires concerted effort before, during, and after elections.

• You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.

• You recognize that an economic system which requires continuous expansion, destroys the environment, relies on rapidly-depleting fossil fuels, exacerbates inequality, and leads to war after war is unsustainable and must be replaced. Score a bonus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what’s unrealistic.

[saunterelle]

Thanks for the clarification ferrous. I agree with some of those and disagree with others. Guess that would make me a left leaning Democrat. Plus, Obama doesn't believe in all of those points either.

[The New Guy]

i don't think you have to score 100% on the test to be considered for membership in the socialist club.

[Mink]

Ferrous, where did this list come from?

[ferrous]

Right off of the Common Dreams website.

www.commondreams.org/about.htm

The Progressive movement and Democratic Solialists in this country are pretty much one in the same.

["The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. DSA's members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics.]

www.dsausa.org/about/index.html

Then we have people like Bernie Sanders;

[Sanders is a self-described democratic socialist, but because he does not belong to a formal political party he appears as an independent on the ballot. Sanders caucuses with the Democratic Party and is counted as a Democrat for the purposes of committee assignments. He was the only independent member of the House during much of his service there and is one of two independent Senators in the 110th Congress, along with Joe Lieberman. Sanders is the first self-described socialist to be elected to the U.S. Senate.]

[Sanders is a co-founder of the House Progressive Caucus and chaired the grouping of mostly left-wing Democrats for its first eight years.]

[An array of national progressive organizations will work to support the efforts of the caucus, including the Institute for Policy Studies, The Nation magazine, MoveOn.org, National Priorities Project, Jobs with Justice, Peace Action, Americans for Democratic Action, and Progressive Democrats of America. Also co-sponsoring the kickoff event were the NAACP, ACLU, Progressive Majority, League of United Latin American Citizens, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, National Council of La Raza, Hip Hop Caucus, Human Rights Campaign, Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs, and the National Hip Hop Political Convention. The CPC has long maintained cordial ties with the Democratic Socialists of America, which hosted its website during the 1990s.]

Let’s see if I have this correct, the Democratic Socialists of America hosted the House progressive Caicus website?

If a progressive looks like a socialist, walks like a socialist, and quacks like a socialist, there is a pretty good chance that a progressive is a socialist.

[ferrous]

Jun 7, 2008 16:35:22 GMT -5 The New Guy said:

i don't think you have to score 100% on the test to be considered for membership in the socialist club.

I thought in the new educational guidelines, they weren't keeping track of performance and grades.

It wasn't if you got an "A" or and "C", it was now pass or fail.

You're right, it doesn't matter whether you get 100% but rather you agree with most of it.

Let's see how well I do on the test.

I agree with the following;

• You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy. (Sorry, my old judea/Christian values and besides, I only agree with 50% of the statement)

• You think that anyone who desires the reins of power that come with high political office should, by reason of that desire, be seen as unfit for the job. (Catch-22)

• You think that instead of more leaders, we need fewer followers. (couldn't agree with that any more)

• You believe that voting every few years is a weak form of political participation, and that achieving social justice requires concerted effort before, during, and after elections. (Local Agenda 21 or us Independents better get busy before it is too late)
________________________________

I got 3 out of 26. How do I rate as being a progressive (socialist) minded person?

[subdjoe]

Lets see how I stack up.

• You think health care is a basic human right, and that single-payer national health insurance is a worthwhile reform on our way toward creating a non-profit national health care service.

It may be a basic human need. But as far as a right, I can't agree with it. As far as a govt. backed, paid for by taxpayers health care, we have seen how well that works elsewhere. I love that the same progressives who decry big govt want to create this boondoggle

• You think that human rights ought always to trump property rights.

Hmmm....what about the right to be secure in your property? And the right to be the owner of what you produce by your labor? this sounds an awful lot like slavery. Or socialism to me.

• You think U.S. military spending is an obscene waste of resources, and that the only freedom this spending protects is the freedom of economic elites to exploit working people all around the planet.

While I agree that there is, or has been, a lot of waste in how the siystem is run, it is not a waste of resources. As far as the elites exploiting the peace loving peasants and workers....yawn

• You think U.S. troops should be brought home not only from Afghanistan and Iraq, but from all 130 countries in which the U.S. has military bases.

This one I half way agree with. I've been saying for years that if all the rest of the world hates us so much, we need to pull all our people back from everywhere. Send no more foreign aid, no more social workers, nothing. Just keep all our people home, let the rest of the world get along without us for a while.

• You think political leaders who engage in “preemptive war” and invasions should be brought to trial for crimes against humanity and judged against the standards of international law established at Nuremberg after World War Two.

And if they DON'T do something, hang them anyway, right? Can't have it both ways.

• You think public education should be free, not just from kindergarten through high school, but as far as a person is willing and able to go.

I'm of two minds on this. I agree that the basic education should be free. Mostly because it is of great benefit to society as a whole to have a well educated electorate. But, don't make the schools into the mechanism for social change and revision that they have become. Teach the basics, in English. Drop all the revisonist courses that teach hatered of white males, and that everything having to do with european traditons is evil.

• You think that electoral reform should include instant run-off voting, publicly-financed elections, easy ballot access for all parties, and proportional representation.

How do you do an 'instant run off?" I almost can agree with the public funding IF it were kept to a very low amount and NO other funding was allowed. How much easier can ballot access be than it already is? maybe send a limo to take people to the polling place, a sedan chair to carry them in, and someone to move their hand for them.

• You think that electoral democracy is not enough, and that democracy must also be participatory and extend to workplaces.

Yeh! I want a 2 hour work day with 8 hours of pay. and nothing that might get me dirty.

• You think that strengthening the rights of all workers to unionize and bargain collectively is a useful step toward full economic democracy.

I agree that unions of some sort are needed as a balance against the power of large companies. Anyone who knows the history of labor in this country should be able to agree with that. As far as 'economic democracy', a nice pipe dream.

• You think that as a society we have a collective obligation to provide everyone who is willing and able to work with a job that pays a living wage and offers dignity.

ROFL!!!! OK, let the people who came up with this one be the garbage collectors, and the ones who go down and deal with the 'soft rocks' in a sewage system. Not that all honest labor doesn't have an natural dignity to it, but I can't see those who whine about not having a dignified job doing the hard, dirty, sweaty work needed to keep a civilization going. The garbage and sewage workers are more important than the teachers, writers, poets, and politicians.

• You think that a class system which forces some people to do dirty, dangerous, boring work all the time, while others get to do clean, safe, interesting work all the time, can never deliver social justice.

see my answer above. This one is just pure, unadulterated bovine excrement

• You think that regulating big corporations isn’t enough, and that such corporations, if they are allowed to exist at all, must either serve the common good or be put into public receivership.

In which case they would cease to make a profit and crash and burn in about 2 years. And who says that large corporations DON'T server the public good? They provide jobs, goods and services that are needed. Maybe the movie industry, and all the socialist actors should be the first in line for this. Test this theroy in that industry first. Pay mikey moore, al baldwin,etc. minimum wage and see how long this lasts.

• You think that the legal doctrine granting corporations the same constitutional rights as natural persons is absurd and must be overturned.

this one I agree with

• You think it’s wrong to allow individuals to accumulate wealth without limits, and that the highest incomes should be capped well before they begin to threaten community and democracy.

bovine excrement

• You think that wealth, not just income, should be taxed.

yeah, let's test it on the likes of Gore, DiFi, Bill&Hill, etc. first

• You think it’s crazy to use the Old Testament as a policy guide for the 21st century.

yeah, lets substitute the india caste system. Or maybe the 16th century samuri code instead.

• You believe in celebrating diversity, while also recognizing that having women and people of color proportionately represented among the class of oppressors is not the goal we should be aiming for.

I'vd never been able to figure out how you 'celebrate diversity'. And have observed that those who preach that don't want diversity, they want conformity.

• You think that the state has no right to kill, and that putting people to death to show that killing is wrong will always be a self-defeating policy.

Yes and no.

• You think that anyone who desires the reins of power that come with high political office should, by reason of that desire, be seen as unfit for the job.

this sword cuts both ways. Those who propose all these socialist idea and want to lead our society that way, are by their own definition unfit for doing that

• You think that instead of more leaders, we need fewer followers.

No, we need more people willing to not be dependant on the State for everything

• You think that national borders, while sometimes establishing territories of safety, more often establish territories of exploitation, much like gang turf.

male bovine excrement

• You are open to considering how the privileges you enjoy because of race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and/or physical ability might come at the expense of others.

only if that applies to everyone

• You believe that voting every few years is a weak form of political participation, and that achieving social justice requires concerted effort before, during, and after elections.

Yes and no. It requires an aware and vigilent electorate that keeps tabs on the capons between elections. And gives regualr comment to them on current issues and legislation. And beats them over the head about toeing the constitutional line.


• You think that, ideally, no one would have more wealth more than they need until everyone has at least as much as they need to live a safe, happy, decent life.

Yeah, and first, I;d like to lay claim to Pelosis vineyards and restaurant. And AlGores mansion.

You recognize that an economic system which requires continuous expansion, destroys the environment, relies on rapidly-depleting fossil fuels, exacerbates inequality, and leads to war after war is unsustainable and must be replaced. Score a bonus point if you understand that sticking to the existing system is what’s unrealistic.

And we'll all be drinin' that free bubble up and eating that rainbow stew.

[ferrous]

By your answers, I can tell one thing:

Subdjoe, you would make one piss poor progressive.

[subdjoe]

<subdjoe doffs his hat and bows like a courtier> Why thank you!