Come on! Adopting some socialist politics isn't going to turn america a communist country. European countries have adopted certain socialist stuff and they aren't considered comunist.
There is no freedom of speech or information in Socialism or Communism. Their way, or their way. No other alternative but death. That is what we will be facing in America soon, and you want it. Retards. When are you gonna stop being brainwashed by the media and start thinking for yourselves. You can't even tell me why Obama is going to make a good president...and because he's black isn't good enough.
After apathy (Bush) comes dependency (now), then comes tyranny. Time to your wake dumbasses up!
this is the worst view I've ever seen about this "Obamscialism". All you do here is prove your non-comprehension of socialism and communism. You've just been trained by US propaganda of them being anti-US and identifying the concepts with the system in the USSR.
The soviet union was forced capitalism, not communism.
Granted, Obama is in a strong position and you should watch him, but that's true for any leader. Obama will be a great leader compared to bush because, well, look at bush!!
it's the usual Repukes tactic here, they accuse the other side of what they themselves are doing and Dems and the press are too surprised/baffled by this jock-cheerleader attack to make a coherent response.
Dems are so naive, they think logical reasoning will win them elections.
Democrats always argue policy and loose to the Repukes on flags and applepie.
Let's do talk policy. Do you not agree that McCain voted to regulate Fannie and Freddie in 2005 and Obama voted against it? Do find the vote...it is all over the net.
As for the backup of my previous statements you called "insane":
Obama: Google "Obama backs 'broad authority' on credit" from Sep 19th.
McCain: Google "McCain says Fed should stop government bailouts"
Since then Obama has moved towards a more cautious approach like McCain.
ha ha! wow, you are unbelievable! You really think that no-one would check that??!? You're TOTALLY LYING!!! McCain didn't vote to regulate ANYTHING, unless it was his speedy, and cowardly divorce from his first wife!!
Hero indeed. I mean, AS IF he could have left his men, and still face up to his father. He was such a dissappoint to grandpa and dad, already, leaving his men would have been the last straw.
McSame is completely unprincipled, selling out to the neoKKKon KKKrazies. McKKKain??
I can't wait til your Obama proves he's a wet blanket and gets us into real trouble... with Iran, the economy or whoever else. He doesn't know the difference between anti-semetic and anti-zionist, and he took "The American empire is reaching the end of the road." as "hateful". If anyone thinks this sort of foreign policy will keep us out of wars and make us a better country in the eyes of the world, they're wrong.
This isn't to say I support McCain, but neither are decent leaders.
McCain actually gave a speech in 2006 on the need to reform and regulate Fannie and Freddie. The bill passed committee with all Republicans supporting and all Dems opposing. The bill was never voted on by the full senate because the Republicans did not believe that there was too much Dem opposition to pass it.
Google: McCain's Early Recognition of Fannie/Freddie Crisis
"The Republicans, including President George Bush and Sen. McCain, saw many years ago that there was a problem with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the potential for a real estate and financial system catastrophe, but the Democrats opposed their reforms. President Bush called for reforms every year and Sen. McCain introduced two bills to correct the problem. But Democrats killed any chance of reform or even of recognition of the problem and the looming meltdown."
lol. I love how you believe Republicans wanted more regulation and the Dems wanted less. That is the exact opposite of what both parties strive for.
Historically, the Repubs are for deregulation and small government (I agree with them) so do you really believe the big bad dems stood in their way to do the opposite??
Even McCain was for LESS regulation in the markets, listen to his speeches back in 2000.
In general the Repubs do want less regulation...that doesn't mean they want no regulation and in this case, they were the ones who wanted more.
Heck, Google "McCain Letter Demanded 2006 Action on Fannie and Freddie" if you don't believe me. What specific regulations did McCain want gone in 2000?
McCain did what he always does, impulsively dive right in with some hairbrained scheme. While Obama said, hey let's wait 15 seconds before we randomly blurt out stuff.
Me personally, I like president with reservation and better impulse control than McDeregulateEverything
Hooray for the failure of the free market! Wait...does that mean I'm going to have to pay the same taxes as my employees because I will no longer be able to evade taxes with my overpaid team of accountants that cook my company's books? Fuck...why do the stupid rich people have to ruin it for the rest of us?
No, it was sarcasm. Of course, anyone who thinks a free market existed after FDR would be a fucking moron - but that's the point, isn't it? This was the failure of a system which was being run as if it were a simulation of the free market, i.e., the derivatives on debt have been, to date, unregulated. Were we ACTUALLY in a free market, money would have just been completely devalued in the US, and subsequently around the world.
gwydion, stop talking BS. This IS a free market, what YOU are referring to is some textbook theoretical approach. No market has ever been with some rules, even if they were unwritten. What you call 'free market' is some lawless situation, so .... fantasy much?
Both Austrian and Keynesian economics are theoretical approaches. To say we haven't had a pure form of either is ignorant. It's a line, and any society finds a spot on there somewhere between the two and tries it out.
Even the most devout Austrian follower knows there needs to be court protection for contractual trades between two people, etc, while Austrian Theory would not allow for it.
The simple concept of liberty requires that as much freedom be allowed in trade as possible without requiring the govt to employ a group of individuals to oversee all the transactions. Depending on the pervasiveness of the govt, the cost of regulations or oversight is automatically added by the increase in taxes or money supply to pay for it. This weakens the position of those making the transaction, and strengthens the position of government, which was never meant to have power over any of it.
and if it only was you, but the rest of the world too! We have to switch to a Euro-based world economy with China as motor. Coz america, they're crazy with anti-abortionist racist 'patriotism' i.e. spying on your neighbours etc.
Sarcism isn't funny when it is poking at bad things that are happening in our country. I think that there may be much worse things ahead, just ask Michael Savage.
but wait ... it's BUSH that is doing these 'socialist' injections. So, first he squandered your tax money in Iraq, 10 billion $ a month, now he's gonna give bad banks 700 BILLION dollars?!? How are Obama and mclame responsible for that? OK, yes mclame is since he's the same as bush, but Obama?
Oh, wait! Repukkkes define 'responsible oversight' as socialism if it stops them from making obscene profits which kick ppl out of their homes! If increasing homelessness is capitalism, I'll be a Commie
I think both sides on this issue are under an extreme.. But, the Commie card is just too easy to play. Just like when it comes to health care on Socialism.
come on, it's extreme hypocrisy AGAIN!! They screech 'Free Market! Free Market! Free Market! Free Market! Free Market!' but when they fuck up, it's our taxdollars that bail out corrupt, greedy and just plain incompetent banks! Yes, everybody should take care of themselves, except rich corperations. gimme a fat fucking break here.
I am saying "both sides are fucked" with that comment... I am not taking sides.. But, I also say that playing the Commie/Socialism card is an easy argument for any political move. Its the same argument against health care.
yeah, it's generally repubs who cowardly label themselves 'independents' which take this 'everybody is equally bad/corrupt' stance. You fail to see hypocrisy on the Repukes side.
The irony is that they demonized regulations as socialist, yet now they use a very socialist measure to bail incompetent businessmen.
Come on! Adopting some socialist politics isn't going to turn america a communist country. European countries have adopted certain socialist stuff and they aren't considered comunist.
Assy84 3 years ago
There is no freedom of speech or information in Socialism or Communism. Their way, or their way. No other alternative but death. That is what we will be facing in America soon, and you want it. Retards. When are you gonna stop being brainwashed by the media and start thinking for yourselves. You can't even tell me why Obama is going to make a good president...and because he's black isn't good enough.
After apathy (Bush) comes dependency (now), then comes tyranny. Time to your wake dumbasses up!
sieloff777 3 years ago
this is the worst view I've ever seen about this "Obamscialism". All you do here is prove your non-comprehension of socialism and communism. You've just been trained by US propaganda of them being anti-US and identifying the concepts with the system in the USSR.
The soviet union was forced capitalism, not communism.
Granted, Obama is in a strong position and you should watch him, but that's true for any leader. Obama will be a great leader compared to bush because, well, look at bush!!
eshnajizzle 2 years ago
This is going to be awesome! Workers of the World Unite! you have nothing to lose but your chains!
Tytsjerksteradiel 3 years ago
AHAHAHAHAHA the music in the background is the best part.
x4812k 3 years ago
Fedor Emilienko for American premier!
MartorDR 3 years ago
No longer available?
Happened to my why were in Iraq video, too...
cm2dude 3 years ago
Let's go anarcho-syndicalist.
MarxBakuninMe 3 years ago
Nice urushanka.
cruzander 3 years ago
Lmfao, communism..
StubbornCanary 3 years ago
I still can't believe only a few hundred people watch this. Hilarious James!
wogsland 3 years ago 2
john135246,
it's the usual Repukes tactic here, they accuse the other side of what they themselves are doing and Dems and the press are too surprised/baffled by this jock-cheerleader attack to make a coherent response.
Dems are so naive, they think logical reasoning will win them elections.
Democrats always argue policy and loose to the Repukes on flags and applepie.
regger099 3 years ago
Let's do talk policy. Do you not agree that McCain voted to regulate Fannie and Freddie in 2005 and Obama voted against it? Do find the vote...it is all over the net.
As for the backup of my previous statements you called "insane":
Obama: Google "Obama backs 'broad authority' on credit" from Sep 19th.
McCain: Google "McCain says Fed should stop government bailouts"
Since then Obama has moved towards a more cautious approach like McCain.
CIDaily 3 years ago
ha ha! wow, you are unbelievable! You really think that no-one would check that??!? You're TOTALLY LYING!!! McCain didn't vote to regulate ANYTHING, unless it was his speedy, and cowardly divorce from his first wife!!
Hero indeed. I mean, AS IF he could have left his men, and still face up to his father. He was such a dissappoint to grandpa and dad, already, leaving his men would have been the last straw.
McSame is completely unprincipled, selling out to the neoKKKon KKKrazies. McKKKain??
TheSteelGeneral 3 years ago
I can't wait til your Obama proves he's a wet blanket and gets us into real trouble... with Iran, the economy or whoever else. He doesn't know the difference between anti-semetic and anti-zionist, and he took "The American empire is reaching the end of the road." as "hateful". If anyone thinks this sort of foreign policy will keep us out of wars and make us a better country in the eyes of the world, they're wrong.
This isn't to say I support McCain, but neither are decent leaders.
gwydion75 3 years ago
@gwydion,
you are even worse, a so-called independent but who is even more extreme right wing than palin.
you can't wait till Obama gets into trouble with Iran? Now WHO wants to lose a war to prove a point!!? It's the fucking RepuKKKes!!
You rather have troops killed, so you can say "Obama is a bad president!" you make me sick, just you want until i get you in my sight ... har har har.
regger099 3 years ago
McCain actually gave a speech in 2006 on the need to reform and regulate Fannie and Freddie. The bill passed committee with all Republicans supporting and all Dems opposing. The bill was never voted on by the full senate because the Republicans did not believe that there was too much Dem opposition to pass it.
Google: McCain's Early Recognition of Fannie/Freddie Crisis
CIDaily 3 years ago
Dude, you are LYING! He did no such thing.
and:
"The bill was never voted on by the full senate because the Republicans did NOT believe that there was too much Dem opposition to pass it."
yer so stupid.
regger099 3 years ago
"The Republicans, including President George Bush and Sen. McCain, saw many years ago that there was a problem with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the potential for a real estate and financial system catastrophe, but the Democrats opposed their reforms. President Bush called for reforms every year and Sen. McCain introduced two bills to correct the problem. But Democrats killed any chance of reform or even of recognition of the problem and the looming meltdown."
Herb Denenberg, The Bulletin
CIDaily 3 years ago
lol. I love how you believe Republicans wanted more regulation and the Dems wanted less. That is the exact opposite of what both parties strive for.
Historically, the Repubs are for deregulation and small government (I agree with them) so do you really believe the big bad dems stood in their way to do the opposite??
Even McCain was for LESS regulation in the markets, listen to his speeches back in 2000.
CetraTJ 3 years ago
In general the Repubs do want less regulation...that doesn't mean they want no regulation and in this case, they were the ones who wanted more.
Heck, Google "McCain Letter Demanded 2006 Action on Fannie and Freddie" if you don't believe me. What specific regulations did McCain want gone in 2000?
CIDaily 3 years ago
Absolutely brilliant!! Поздравляем товарища для вашего глубокий взгляд на
Американской экономики.
TheAmericanPirate 3 years ago
Excellent!! Very funny and Very thought provoking...
caserus 3 years ago
...
TheoVanDerDeer 3 years ago
Good vid Comrade Kotecski!
:P
RogCBrand 3 years ago
Great video, but I had trouble understanding you over the music.
BurntToasty 3 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
If I am wrong then show we where I am. I am open.
I repeat, it was Obama strong supporting the bailout and McCain expressing reservation. Please show me quotes that say different.
Don't just "think" that I got them mixed up.
Show me.
CIDaily 3 years ago
you show us. you make the insane statement.
McCain did what he always does, impulsively dive right in with some hairbrained scheme. While Obama said, hey let's wait 15 seconds before we randomly blurt out stuff.
Me personally, I like president with reservation and better impulse control than McDeregulateEverything
regger099 3 years ago
Hooray for the failure of the free market! Wait...does that mean I'm going to have to pay the same taxes as my employees because I will no longer be able to evade taxes with my overpaid team of accountants that cook my company's books? Fuck...why do the stupid rich people have to ruin it for the rest of us?
GyrinidaeRex 3 years ago
You think this is a failure of the free market? You realize the last time we had a free market was in the late 1800's right?
You're blaming something today from something that last existed 100 years ago. Incredible.
gwydion75 3 years ago
No, it was sarcasm. Of course, anyone who thinks a free market existed after FDR would be a fucking moron - but that's the point, isn't it? This was the failure of a system which was being run as if it were a simulation of the free market, i.e., the derivatives on debt have been, to date, unregulated. Were we ACTUALLY in a free market, money would have just been completely devalued in the US, and subsequently around the world.
GyrinidaeRex 3 years ago
gwydion, stop talking BS. This IS a free market, what YOU are referring to is some textbook theoretical approach. No market has ever been with some rules, even if they were unwritten. What you call 'free market' is some lawless situation, so .... fantasy much?
TheSteelGeneral 3 years ago
Both Austrian and Keynesian economics are theoretical approaches. To say we haven't had a pure form of either is ignorant. It's a line, and any society finds a spot on there somewhere between the two and tries it out.
Even the most devout Austrian follower knows there needs to be court protection for contractual trades between two people, etc, while Austrian Theory would not allow for it.
gwydion75 3 years ago
The simple concept of liberty requires that as much freedom be allowed in trade as possible without requiring the govt to employ a group of individuals to oversee all the transactions. Depending on the pervasiveness of the govt, the cost of regulations or oversight is automatically added by the increase in taxes or money supply to pay for it. This weakens the position of those making the transaction, and strengthens the position of government, which was never meant to have power over any of it.
gwydion75 3 years ago
VIVA LA REVOLUTION!
VIVA CHE GUIVERA!
bl4ckd0g187 3 years ago 2
viva la revolutionnnnnnn
jmeiskues 3 years ago 2
Yippie! Furry hats for everyone!
jackieknoch 3 years ago
Nice, Hat!
sealord2k1 3 years ago
Fuckin hilarious, power to the proletariat Comrade.
Emassei 3 years ago 4
WE'RE DOOMED
HG2013 3 years ago
and if it only was you, but the rest of the world too! We have to switch to a Euro-based world economy with China as motor. Coz america, they're crazy with anti-abortionist racist 'patriotism' i.e. spying on your neighbours etc.
regger099 3 years ago
Hats confer authority.
Maybe the USSR went on for so long because they wore furry hats...
gcooperzero 3 years ago 2
Hats be keepink your head varm when above da Arctic Circle in da labor camps comrade. Also good place to be keepink your vodka!
andy370 3 years ago 3
Seemingly mocking but surprisingly accurate
RobDSmart 3 years ago
ok, summing up:
- Bush lied about the WMD, costing us trillions of dollars, maiming tens of thousands & killing over 4000 troops.
- Bush 'lost' 23 Billion thru stealing and incompetence in Iraq
- bush abused the 911 victims for political gain
- Bush committed treason against Valerie Plame
And now he stuffs 700 Billion dollars of OUR money into his buddies banks?!?!?
and mccain agreed with all of that, and STILL this race is tight? unfuckingbelievelable!!!
regger099 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wasn't is Obama that was the first one out strongly supporting the bailout and McCain being the one saying, not so fast?
Oh yeah...that is what happened. Go look it up online.
Looks like Obama is the one who is like Bush as of late.
CIDaily 3 years ago
Vote for the CP USA ! USA need real change. One very very big delta.
mi3a 3 years ago
Sarcism isn't funny when it is poking at bad things that are happening in our country. I think that there may be much worse things ahead, just ask Michael Savage.
tbonealaska 3 years ago
LOL, great work, Comrade Kochetski!
579862BRADLEY579862 3 years ago
one step away from polyarchy, two steps further into debt... I'm not sure how to feel...
jschrein 3 years ago
you should have also talked about how you guys are now on the McCain enemy's list as well as the new your times
masterhook 3 years ago
I need some Pepto. These are scary times.
ladyjade3 3 years ago
but wait ... it's BUSH that is doing these 'socialist' injections. So, first he squandered your tax money in Iraq, 10 billion $ a month, now he's gonna give bad banks 700 BILLION dollars?!? How are Obama and mclame responsible for that? OK, yes mclame is since he's the same as bush, but Obama?
Oh, wait! Repukkkes define 'responsible oversight' as socialism if it stops them from making obscene profits which kick ppl out of their homes! If increasing homelessness is capitalism, I'll be a Commie
regger099 3 years ago 2
I think both sides on this issue are under an extreme.. But, the Commie card is just too easy to play. Just like when it comes to health care on Socialism.
calciumblue 3 years ago 2
come on, it's extreme hypocrisy AGAIN!! They screech 'Free Market! Free Market! Free Market! Free Market! Free Market!' but when they fuck up, it's our taxdollars that bail out corrupt, greedy and just plain incompetent banks! Yes, everybody should take care of themselves, except rich corperations. gimme a fat fucking break here.
regger099 3 years ago
I am saying "both sides are fucked" with that comment... I am not taking sides.. But, I also say that playing the Commie/Socialism card is an easy argument for any political move. Its the same argument against health care.
calciumblue 3 years ago
yeah, it's generally repubs who cowardly label themselves 'independents' which take this 'everybody is equally bad/corrupt' stance. You fail to see hypocrisy on the Repukes side.
The irony is that they demonized regulations as socialist, yet now they use a very socialist measure to bail incompetent businessmen.
regger099 3 years ago
We are going to slip into socialism if either of these two tards get in.
wbradd3797 3 years ago
Corporate Socialism.
Human beings are livestock, corporations are citizens.
Weaseldog2001 3 years ago
First Comment!!! Plus I agree, we are one step away from socialism.
bigdaddysly101 3 years ago
Great video as always.
BigWillieStyles1212 3 years ago