Go to Across the Fruited Plain
- Add a comment
- Go to Mr Bowtox, aka the arrogant douchebag, gets his panties in a wad
Re: Re: Re: Re: mouse
Who's a Marxist, Adam Smith? Or Teddy Roosevelt? I have to say, as you have admitted you've never read Marx, I'm going to stick with my understanding, because I have. Obama is no Marxist. He's not the one who nationalized American banks.
posted by
mousehop
on November 1, 2008 at 5:37 PM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Xeno lives in the woods, and blogs from a public library.
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 29, 2008 at 11:26 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: mouse
Again, he's a Marxist.
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 29, 2008 at 11:25 AM
| link to this | reply
Obama's bathroom has two toilets. One is made of gold and the other one is made of wood. Obama only uses the wooden toilet out of solidarity with the downtrodden. The sight of the golden toilet helps him to maintain class conscience.......Xeno how many toilets do you have?
posted by
Corbin_Dallas
on October 29, 2008 at 10:37 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: mouse
Being outside a cave, you should have recognized the difference between Marxism and proposals by the founder of economics, Adam Smith. So should the journalist. Marx proposed violent over-throw of sitting governments by workers, and then government control of capital. Smith proposed having the wealthy pay a higher share of taxes. The two are hardly equivalent.
posted by
mousehop
on October 29, 2008 at 10:26 AM
| link to this | reply
Including yours
posted by
Straightforward
on October 28, 2008 at 3:54 PM
| link to this | reply
I was quite amused by the comments on this one
posted by
Straightforward
on October 28, 2008 at 3:53 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: ain't no digging for truth there
No, I don't idolize rush, but I do listen to him since his view line up with mine in some ways.
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 28, 2008 at 10:08 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: ain't no digging for truth there
I guess you idolize Rush.
Don't know, but it seems so. You are by Rush as you infer others are by Obama -- can't do wrong.
I have listened to his shows -- he give half truths, innuendo, rumor-mongering, eetc., and when someone is on the air to questoinhim, he shuts them off right away.
He is an exploiter. Any biography will tell you -- he wasn't successful until he found his talk-show personna. If there were money and success in being a liberal, he would change almost overnight.
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 28, 2008 at 9:53 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: mouse
but no I have not exhaustively read Marx. I also have not been living in a cave all of my life.
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 27, 2008 at 5:20 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: ain't no digging for truth there
Limbaugh is very smart guy, so taking questions prepared from him is a good thing. Opponents who hate Limbaugh, his success, his money, and his voice and ideas have villified Limbaughs name into some sort of byword.
Xeno: dirty tricks is the nature of the buisness ALL of these guys are in. Hello?
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 27, 2008 at 4:53 PM
| link to this | reply
mouse
Why would anyone read Marx when there have already been large scale demonstrations of the failure of his ideas when implemented.
Kind of like reading a textbook on filmmaking by Ed Wood Jr.
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 27, 2008 at 4:45 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Missing the Marx
Now, how can you comment on someone being called a Marxist without reading Marx?
In fact, Adam Smith said the wealthy should pay more in taxes in proportion to their income. He favored government sponsored redistribution of wealth to that extent, because the poor spend most of their income on necessities of life.
Any journalist worth his salt should know enough about this to know that asking if Obama's tax plan is "Marxist" is a stupid, partisan stunt, and not a serious question. Next he'll be asking if Obama's health care plan is connected with the illegal drug trade.
posted by
mousehop
on October 27, 2008 at 4:23 PM
| link to this | reply
ain't no digging for truth there
bringing up old, disreputable charges that have been debunked a thousand times over -- by innuendo and inference continuing the ugliness. The interviewer was a prima donna, parroting questions some Rush Limbaugh thinking asshole prepared.
I won't aplogize for getting angry over this -- we are looking at dirty tricks that have marked Republicans for 35 years now.
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 27, 2008 at 1:23 PM
| link to this | reply
xeno
I don't see why you're so pissy. Your guy is probably going to win, and the Dems could win majority in the House. God help us.
Apparently, you equate "asshole" questions with digging for the truth about who Obama really is and what he really wants to do, flowery platitudes aside.
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 26, 2008 at 10:19 AM
| link to this | reply
I WOULD TOO AFTER VIEWING THE INTERVIEW
If good,solid questions had been asked then I would have a problem with the Obama camp.
But the interviewer brought up al lthe false innuendo and basically hateful attacks that have been swirling around the ether for some time now, whic have been totally discredited.
But this is the Right, after all, and the right is pit-bullish on any opposition. Attack dogs tearing up any semblance of propriety. This since Pat Buchanan and his "dirty tricks" for Nixon -- then Rush Limbaugh and his ugly, one sided, inaccurate attack dog style that doesn't allow opposing voices, cuts them off after a couple words.
I wish the Right had some scruples.
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 26, 2008 at 9:32 AM
| link to this | reply
I like your raw approach. My mistake is sometimes trying reason with the left.
posted by
mordent
on October 26, 2008 at 7:58 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Sheesh. It didn't take much, did it?
You're cute. I only thought I used that word pansie.
Yes my dear it is an era of the thin-skinned.
posted by
mordent
on October 26, 2008 at 7:57 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Sheesh. It didn't take much, did it?
I'm not too thrilled myself.
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 25, 2008 at 5:50 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Missing the Marx
No, I haven't read Marx, if I have insomnia I take an Ambian. Screw Marx and the chuck wagon he rode in on.
Is that deep enough?
posted by
calmcantey75
on October 25, 2008 at 5:49 PM
| link to this | reply
Sheesh. It didn't take much, did it?
They collectively have very thin skins.
Gee, but I'm so "thrilled" about the distinct possibility of having these pansies in the White House.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on October 25, 2008 at 5:21 PM
| link to this | reply
Missing the Marx
Hardly a deep or meaningful question. Uh, is raising taxes on the wealthy and lowering them on the poor Marxist? Well, now, have your read Marx? This isn't even in the ballpark.
posted by
mousehop
on October 25, 2008 at 5:16 PM
| link to this | reply