Quote Liberty-First:And if I understand you correctly, you lean towards socialism.

Socialism is a tricky field, like LOVE. Wait, where's my brand-new twitter-machinegun.....

Quote On Twitter ClarissaSmith2:@normangoldman "What is liberal?" What is love? Some say "Jesus", others "sex", others mean their kids or pets. Life is relative ;o)

Norman is not wrong if he claims the term "liberal" was confusing him, because in Europe it means something different. It's even more difficult with SOCIALISM: The "socialism" of the old Soviet Union is totally different from what a Social Democrat calls "socialism", and what some people from the left wing in the Catholic political scene mean is a little different still.

The Republicans Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower where pretty socialist too. If you listen to Thom, you already heard that.

Quote Liberty-First:I still don’t really have a clear idea what you advocate for.

Politicized I got last summer, during the House gridlock and then credit downgrade. Basically since then I'm learning by doing -- political fight. I already know in summer I'll be fighting out on the street. So then I will have to be tougher and show faster reaction....

Educating America is very important to me. *** Then of course driving money and corporate influence out of Congress. *** I DON'T think poor, jobless, underprivileged have to blame themselves! I am for welfare! Care for the fellow American who is weaker than the successful *** I want strong unions *** money is not speech, corporations aren't people! *** I want monopolies to be watched, like in Europe, because they destroy the free market *** I am for gay rights *** I (as liberal Catholic) very much fight those fundamentalist Christians who try to roll back women rights!!

Well, basically I am a Keynesian and a liberal.

Why, we have growth again. Despite GOP-gridlock. ;o)

President Obama was inaugurated in January 2009, in the year after that GOP-election-fraud and he lost the house. Since then GOP-gridlock, GOP-downgrade of our credit rate, GOP filibuster....

Nevertheless he did great work! Well, I don't want to praise him too much, but if you consider all those facts, YES:

Quote joe1223:So Obama is wonderful and perfect and all of the problems we're having are Bush's fault!

This time you really nailed it. Thanks a lot!

The GOP is totally bought be the Koch brothers and now entirely destroyed. All that's left is pure insanity. Republicans are lunatic libertarians, Christian ayatollahs, fascists talking about attacking Iran....

Here, read this, I love it!

Quote leighmf: The Grand Old Party is in shambles and pretty soon it will be as embarassing to be a Republican as it is to be on Unemployment. People are going to get ticked off and a few guys are going to have to punch each other out, right in front of us.

If you wanna discuss how to take back the GOP, restitute, heal and repair what the Koch brothers destroyed, I'm all for it, mauiman. But frankly, your current argumentation is good for nothing but VOP............. very old people. Old and gaga.

If Bill Maher can put up $1M for Obama's Super Fund...maybe I'll vote for him again. Yes, that's right, I am voting for Bill Maher...I mean Obama. And maybe that is not even a good reason to vote for him any more than John Q Nobody liking a candidate for any other non-sensical reason...flashy pixels on a TV set that tweak the predilections of years of brain-washing propaganda. Like fish attracted to flashy bait, many people will snap up on all of that advertising with cute jingles or treacherous digs against the opponents. Not that I think Obama will be any different in the next 4 years. But I would sure hate it if a Republican got that spot. With people like Newt Grinch croaking at us with stupid inanities and Mitt wearing his magic underwear, Ron Paul sure sounds like a better alternative except he scares the heck out of me on the social programs that he is bound to trash. And that is a real deal breaker....so I would never vote for Ron Paul even though I believe he is right on the money about the fallacy of foreign wars. But it really doesn't matter what these people say, anyway, because they are all just trying to say anything just to get elected. What they do after they get elected is what counts.

"Voters are not yet supporting a radical position to restructure the whole system. But at least they are coming to see that small marginal reforms won’t work, or are simply trick promises, like President Obama’s promise that banks would renegotiate mortgages for homes in negative equity as part of the quid pro quo for the bailouts they received from Treasury Secretary Geithner. There’s been no quid pro quo, merely talk.

People see that law enforcement is missing when it comes to the banks and Wall Street. So simply restoring the criminal justice system would be progress. It used to be that if you ran a fraud, if you cheated people, if you lied on your income tax and falsified statistics, then you would be sent to jail. But the Obama administration has appointed Eric Holder to represent Wall Street. He has not thrown any bankers in jail, recognizing that they are the major campaign contributors of the party, after all."

"So what began as anger has become a gathering awareness that Mr. Obama was simply fooling voters instead of leading the change he promised. That’s what politicians do, of course. But people hoped that he might be different. That was the gullibility he played on. He has turned into the nightmare they thought they were voting against."

"Moving to the right of the Republicans, he started his administration by appointing the Simpson-Bowles Commission staffed by opponents of Social Security. He recently followed that up by appointing the Congressional Super-committee of Twelve to come out with an even more anti-Social Security, anti-Medicaid and anti-minority position that the Republicans could get away with. If they would have tried to pass such a right-wing policy, the Democratic Congress would have refused to pass it. But they don’t know how to deal with a Democratic president who appoints Wall Street lobbyists to his cabinet and acts like Margaret Thatcher saying that There Is No Alternative (TINA) to making Social Security recipients, labor and minorities pay for Wall Street’s bad gambles and bank losses. He has helped Wall Street capture the government – on behalf of the 1%."

"The man whom Mr. Obama asked to be his mentor when he joined the Senate was Joe Lieberman. He evidently gave Obama expert advice about how to raise funds from the financial class by delivering his liberal constituency to his Wall Street campaign contributors. So the problem is not that President Obama is well meaning but inept – an idealist who just can’t fight the vested interests and insiders. He’s thrown in his lot with them. In fact, he really seems to believe the right-wing, pro-Wall Street ideology – that the economy can’t function without a financial system that guarantees “savers” (the top 1%) against loss, even when the bottom 99% have to pay more and more."

"And on a personal level, Mr. Obama knows that his fund raising comes mainly from Wall Street, and the only way to get this money is to sell out his constituency. You’ve got to give him enough credit to recognize this obvious fact."

"The upshot is that we now have a political nightmare. Yet Mr. Obama still seems to be the best that the Democrats can offer! This is why I think the protestors are saying they are not going to let the Democrats jump in front of the parade to try and mobilize support for their party. Like the Irish say: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” They realize that the financial system is broken and that neither party is trying to do much about it. So the political system has to be changed as well as the economic system."

http://michael-hudson.com/2011/11/reforming-the-u-s-financial-and-tax-sy...

Thanks Clarissa Smith
RE: Libertarians.

The founding fathers all had a conception of the role of government that was vastly more limited than what we accept today. If they were to come back to us they would undoubtedly be in favor of eliminating 90% or more of the functions of all levels of modern government. Their principals on limited government leaned towards libertarian. And not even close to liberal or communist.

Progressive Liberalism on the other hand is contrary to the constitution. It advocates for big government and massive encroachments on liberty. It’s basically socialism.
But socialism is such a nasty word. So they came up with the name “Liberal”. And when they realized they can never turn the country socialist in one swoop, they came up with the progressive approach. “Which is to subvert and take over slowly, one baby step at a time”. (Very sneaky). Things like taking over the schools and churches and re-educating with socialist propaganda.
(Read “Rules Radicals” if it isn’t already under your pillow).

Thus today they call themselves “Progressive Liberals”.
But by putting their agenda out so openly in the face of the public over the past 3 years, I believe the “Progressive” movement has suffered irreparable public relations damage. The resumes of any of the CZARS would have the founding fathers running for muskets and drawing battle lines. :)
Make no mistake; the 2010 midterms underlined the repudiation of socialist policies and all the sneaky back room deals.

What happened to Obama’s promise to put the healthcare debates on CSPAN?
In fact I actually think he honestly intended to do that, but high-ups in his party and/or other shadow interests seem to have ordered him to follow a different agenda.

The constitution is at the foundation of modern day Libertarian ideology. So if you think Libertarians are crazy lunatics, then perhaps you think the founding fathers were crazy lunatics too since they had the same beliefs. So you must not defend the constitution. Which means you might be happier in some other country with the values you think are sane and just.
You mentioned you liked Germany. I don’t see America adopting the German constitution any time soon, so is there any chance you could move there to get away from all us lunatics? :)

I never said I was going Germany; I thought you were going there when Obama is dethroned in 2012?

If Wisconsin replaces Scott Walker with a Democrat, they will be in the same boat as Illinois is in a hurry, mark my words. And if both Nancy Pelosi and Barak Obama had just a few more years in control of the US, the entire country would be bankrupt, just like Illinois is. Look at all the damage that they did in just two years! The voters in the US are obviously smarter than the voters in Illinois.

The Democrats (or liberals) just do not have the guts to do the right thing finacially, all they do is buy votes with tax dollars that do not exist and bankrupt the goverment they are in control of. The state of Illinois, and the countries of Greece and Italy are perfect examples of how that works.

Historically, it was in the power elites' best interests to let the United States, the major "emerging economy" of the 19th century, to take over as much of North America as possible.

Then, in the 20th century, since the European Empires had been decimated in the two World Wars, it was in the power elites' best interests to let the United States overthrow foreign governments to spread the American Empire.

Now, like all great empires, the American Empire is in decline.So it is now in the power elites' best interests to refocus their attention (and investments) to other emerging economies like Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa which by the way, combined, account for almost half of the World's population.

The United States of America is becoming moot.

Tyler.I RE: I don't think that anyone thinks we should be involved in another war.

I So Agree With Every Last Word You Say!

The EPA was created by Jimmy Carter in the 70’s to insure America was not subjected to the mercy of OPEC ever again.
There mission was to make the USA energy independent. Since then, like all bureaucracies, it has grown into a bloated tyranny that does everything possible to prevent America from becoming energy independent. In fact we are more beholden to Middle East OPEC oil than ever.
And this agency costs the tax payers billions and is so over regulating small and big businesses alike that it is killing jobs wholesale.

Meanwhile the dash board wobble heads on the moon bat left oppose every solution to get us off OPEC dependency as well as oil from rogue regimes such as Venezuela.
And Obama wanted to invest billions to help Brazil develop its oil while offering Americas over priced Chevy Volts with exploding batteries.
By the way, according to some estimates, Volts cost the tax payer over $200,000.00 for every car sold due to bailouts, $7-10K rebates and endless subsidies and big union interests. And nobody wants them because they are too expensive, even when Obama offers huge taxpayer funded rebates.
It’s a lemon, I think they have sold 600 to date, and Hollywood global warning folks probably bought most of them to make it look trendy. But the average folks are not as “knuckle dragging stupid” as the left wants you to believe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avLKiWi71cE&feature=player_embedded

If we wake up and produce more of North American energy we won’t need to meddle in the Middle East.

1) Increase drilling - Obama has reduced new drill permit issuing by 50% in the last 3 years and blocked Anwar. "Which by the way is wasteland tundra".
2) Clear XL Pipeline for construction. That will reduce imports from Rogue regimes by 8%. That number is huge and will lower gas prices. But Obama rejects imports from friendly Canada right next door. Canada has said to Obama, you better make your mind up, when we build the pipeline to the US border, it either cross’s the border or the pipe makes a right turn westward to British Columbia where it will be tankered to China.
3) Tap our natural gas reserves, enough to power our cars cheaply for 100 years. It’s clean with minimal emissions.
4) Keep working on other energy solutions, try and build a more affordable solar panel systems so the average person can afford them. Wind power too.
5) Consider thermal energy like they have in Iceland
6) Try lots of things that we know will work NOW, not all our invested energy into things that are still a long way out, like hydrogen, or “algae to fuel” etc.

If we get out of the Middle East conflict, all that wasted treasure is returned to the USA to help pay off Obama’s debt. The Muslims will be happy to see us out of their cherished lands, and they won’t have to send any more terrorists. We could even see a day when the TSA can be dismantled. But like the EPA, it will probably grow and morph and stay forever under ever evolving new missions.

Democratic Socialism, or Social Democratic policy means nothing but watching monopolies and fighting them. I would be very happy with the German system, which basically was created by a conservative, Christian party -- the "Christian Democrats". Merkel is still a conservative -- in a social democracy. The police in Germany is not as violent as here. We already have problems with violent police and unjust judges.

That Obama will go on as president is a sure thing. The only question is: will we get the House back? If we won't get the House, we will be able to change and improve a few things throughout the country, but not enough. This would be a great chance for the developing countries, to really overwelm us. It might be too late then and there will be no way back to the old American strength.....

Quote Liberty-First:step away from the dark side before your soul is lost