DiscussMormonism.com

canpakes wrote:

ldsfaqs wrote:Since the 60's the communists worked to start taking over the contry from within, instead of Bombings etc. like Bill Ayers, they switched to changing it gradually by infiltrating government and education, so we now have the first communist President.

I'm talking about today's Democratic party, not that of the past, thus history doesn't contradict my statement at all.

I've been waiting for over 6 years now to hear what makes Obama a 'communist' president. No one seems able to explain it.

Well, ldsfaqs, what about it? Where are the nationalized industries, the one-party state, the gulag archipelago? My fellow comrades, I mean fellow democrats, would love to know.

canpakes wrote:

ldsfaqs wrote:Since the 60's the communists worked to start taking over the contry from within, instead of Bombings etc. like Bill Ayers, they switched to changing it gradually by infiltrating government and education, so we now have the first communist President.

I'm talking about today's Democratic party, not that of the past, thus history doesn't contradict my statement at all.

I've been waiting for over 6 years now to hear what makes Obama a 'communist' president. No one seems able to explain it.

You're clearly not paying attention then, only getting fed the news from certain sympathetic sources, not seeing the whole truth.

MeDotOrg wrote:Well, ldsfaqs, what about it? Where are the nationalized industries, the one-party state, the gulag archipelago? My fellow comrades, I mean fellow democrats, would love to know.

Communists know they couldn't change America to their ideology's and practices in one fail swoop, so they've been doing it gradually through education and government.
Like I said above, if you're not seeing things, then you need to be studying more alternate news sources from what you're used to.

ldsfaqs wrote:

MeDotOrg wrote:Well, ldsfaqs, what about it? Where are the nationalized industries, the one-party state, the gulag archipelago? My fellow comrades, I mean fellow democrats, would love to know.

Communists know they couldn't change America to their ideology's and practices in one fail swoop, so they've been doing it gradually through education and government.
Like I said above, if you're not seeing things, then you need to be studying more alternate news sources from what you're used to.

lds, your conclusion is wrong again. This is getting to be quite the usual thing.

If, for example, I state openly that you like to rub male poodles inappropriately, then I should have something to back that up, otherwise I'd just be making a silly statement.

Likewise, if you want to call Obama a communist, you need to show something that backs that claim up. Otherwise, I'll just figure that you have no actual valid argument and are instead content merely to state something silly, perhaps while you rub male poodles inappropriately. Or something.

The choice is yours.

canpakes wrote:lds, your conclusion is wrong again. This is getting to be quite the usual thing.

If, for example, I state openly that you like to rub male poodles inappropriately, then I should have something to back that up, otherwise I'd just be making a silly statement.

Likewise, if you want to call Obama a communist, you need to show something that backs that claim up. Otherwise, I'll just figure that you have no actual valid argument and are instead content merely to state something silly, perhaps while you rub male poodles inappropriately. Or something.

The choice is yours.

It's like liberals have never heard of Google before, they expect people to do the work THEY should be doing themselves, authentic balanced study, you expect us to do the work for you, THEN you just ignore it, claim it propaganda or whatever, thus you never understand or see the full truth.

But, I'll entertain you.... and watch you ignore the facts.
Read each of these pages and watch the videos in them. And there is much much more examples out there.
This is just a TASTE of who Obama is and what he does, and especially those with him. The ideology's, beliefs and actions of those with a president also say much.

22 Things Obama Has Done Which Are CLEARLY Socialist
http://mrconservative.com/2013/02/5276- ... socialist/

President Obama's Marxist-Leninist Economics: Fact And Fiction
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendric ... d-fiction/

Is President Obama Really A Socialist? Let's Analyze Obamanomics
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrar ... amanomics/

THE COMMUNIST TAKEOVER PLAN
http://www.commieblaster.com/news/commu ... -plan.html

Proof Obama's a: Communist / Socialist (note, a few things in this page/site are well, speculation and/or false, but it's full of plenty of facts also, so don't be afraid)
http://www.commieblaster.com/obama/index.html

Obama’s Platform Is Eerily Similar to the Communist Party USA’s
http://www.independentsentinel.com/obam ... arty-usas/

ldsfaqs wrote:Is President Obama Really A Socialist? Let's Analyze Obamanomics
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrar ... amanomics/

I wonder if Mr. Ferrara purposefully used CBO numbers that didn't include capital gains, or if that was just an oversight on his part.

Doctor Steuss wrote:

ldsfaqs wrote:Is President Obama Really A Socialist? Let's Analyze Obamanomics
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrar ... amanomics/

I wonder if Mr. Ferrara purposefully used CBO numbers that didn't include capital gains, or if that was just an oversight on his part.

What are you even talking about?

He talks about the CBO #'s in relation to income earners and federal income taxes, and then much of the rest of the article is talking about capital gains.
Do you just make things up so you can cast doubt on something so people don't read it?

ldsfaqs wrote:What are you even talking about?

Shaft. John Shaft. Can you dig it?

He talks about the CBO #'s in relation to income earners and federal income taxes, and then much of the rest of the article is talking about capital gains.

The CBO #'s and their relation to income earners and federal income taxes can potentially be skewed by the inclusion of capital gains, and their rate of taxation. In other words, it doesn't necessarily create an overall picture of "income" by leaving a type of income separate from the numbers he uses as his spring board. Maybe it doesn't change the overall outcome (maybe it makes Obama out to be an even more egregious pinko commie bastard than Mr. Ferrara’s thesis) -- just pondering if it was on purpose or not.

Do you just make things up so you can cast doubt on something so people don't read it?

Not usually, but “Hell on Wheels” doesn't have a new season drop on Netflix for a while, so I figured it might make for a fun interim hobby. With the lingering increase from the PM boom, I just can't afford numismatics as my preferred fallback hobby. Maybe I could take up playing with Legos, though... always a thought.

As you know capital gains is a tax, and not an "individual" tax which is what he was talking about in the first part of his article when talking about Obama's/liberal lying claim that the wealthy doesn't pay their fair share of taxes.

He then goes on to general tax policy's, primarily capital gains and discusses their hurtfulness to the economy and Obama's increasing them.

So, him not talking about Capital gains in reference to individual taxation was clearly intentional. One is not the other.

ldsfaqs wrote:As you know capital gains is a tax,

Well, maybe that's where my problem is coming from. I apparently mistakenly believed that a capital gain was a profit (i.e. "income") realized from capital assets.