Socialism Must Be Opposed
Uploader Comments (TravisTCleveland)
Top Comments
-
Socialism is slavery. If you are unable to keep the fruits of your labor then you are nothing but a slave. I do not wish to be a slave of any man or State.
-
To obamadidit2008:
#3...
The difference between Democrats and Republicans is: Democrats have accepted some ideas of Socialism cheerfully, while Republicans have accepted them reluctantly"
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism", they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."
-ACLU Founding father Norman Thomas.
All Comments (16)
-
Don't let Obama fool you, he's a puppet on a teleprompter
-
1. Bush bought specifically NON-controlling stock, Obama wants absolute control of industries he knows nothing about, and a continuation of the same liberal thinking that led to there downfall in the firstplace.
2. The Gov't does not have money, it gets it through taxing the people, or prints it and devalues the dollar. If the people don't have money, the government can't make money.
As for #3....(cont.)
-
Be ready to fulfill the obligations of the second amendment. We may need to remind the liberals that our founding fathers intended a government that feared the people.
-
Another great vid Travis...and great song. I'm madder than hell...but then again I'm just another teabaggin, anti-govt., anti-CNN Redneck I guess.
-
I really don't understand why liberals don't get this.. its not that hard! I'm really not supper smart.. and I don't have to be to get what is happening! I just hope I still have a great country when I come home from Iraq!
WHAT SOCIALISM??!! 1. remember the first bailout of banks began under bush and paulson. 2. if the public or the private sector won't or can't spend money, then it has to be the govt. as a last resort. 3. words like socialism, and fascism, et al. have been overused and abused by conservatives.
obamadidit2008 2 years ago
Yes, and under Bush they were *just* as bad. Many of us have been opposing the policies of high spending and big government for years -- President bush wasn't immune to it.
You call it a 'last resort', which is completely untrue. And even if it were, it is not the government's business to get involved in a company. If the company is to fail: IT SHOULD FAIL.
Socialism is defined by the government having a large amount of control in a business. Obama firing a CEO fits that definition.
TravisTCleveland 2 years ago
Edit: Well, not quite 'just' as bad. At least his didn't reach into the trillions. They were still wrong though.
"Fascism" overused by conservatives? You have to be kidding me. People in glass houses....
We'll stop using socialism when the Liberals stop trying to push for it. (i.e. Congresswoman Maxine).
TravisTCleveland 2 years ago
Obama is a good man and maybe that CEO was doing something he shouldn't.But as a kind man taking an unkind job he was basically trapped into signing that bill. We will never understand each others point of views because we don't want to. Example: James Carter- Good man, bad President. Right. I don't know I wasn't alive then but i believe it because he's done great things and Obama will to given the chance.
twistedkilla999 2 years ago
It is irrelevant if the CEO was doing something 'wrong', Obama has no right. Zero. To fire a private company's Chief Executive Officer.
I understand your point of view just fine, I just know that it's wrong.
TravisTCleveland 2 years ago