Damn right I'm a socialist.

[SmileyRose]

Hey, fuck me but I happen to LIKE the fact our public government schools pool all our money together to make sure every kid in America get at least some sort of minimal chance. And I happen to LIKE the fact we pool our money together to buy basic police and fire and emergency medical response services a hell of lot more efficiently than if we all bought our own personal security force. And you know what, fuck me but I LIKE that we pool our money together to support the transportation infrastructure crisscrossing the country so I can have oranges and fresh lettuce year round.

And you betcha if we can pool our money together and build a medical care infrastructure than benefits the vast majority of Americans I'm all over that too.

So yes, I am a god damned evil socialist librul and if you think that means I don't love my fellow countrymen then FUCK YOU.

[ananda]

1. Fuck me, too! lol

Socialism looks pretty good right now.

[SammyWinstonJack]

30. +1

:thumbsup:

[Ysabela]

69. Amen

[Rick Myers]

2. I'm a socialist too!!!

I'm a vet. The VA is socialist medicine. I like having a military, police, fire and EMT. Paved roads and clean water.

[HughMoran]

3. Absolutely

Republicans are too stupid to know the difference between the essentials for good living and greedy ass holes raping the citizens. Republicans are not human.

[SmileyRose]

4. That's not stupidity, that's insanity.

Anyone who's delusional enough to think Barack Hussein Obama is going to destroy their shot at being richer than God should be locked up for their own protection.

[HughMoran]

8. That's why they hate his guts - he's letting them have their cake and eat it too

How can they win the argument?

SO it's just NO! for the sake of NO! They look like bitter old codgers.

[SmileyRose]

9. President Barack Obama ((I love saying that))

is the master of giving people just enough rope.........

[aquart]

13. Yes. They are.

And it is both useless and stupid to demonize them that way. It's exactly what they do to us. But they live in a country that allows them to speak even their stupidest opinions. Just as it allows you.

[Truth2Tell]

5. OK fine, fuck me too. nt

[anonymous171]

6. That's not socialism. That's common sense. nt

[DebbieCDC]

7. Yep fuck me too

Have long considered myself a socialist

[patrice]

10. I'm a Socialist too. I believe Society OWES me Real Value in exchange for the Real Value of my Labor

and money is NOT Real Value. Money is an abstract value. Real Value is stuff like Comprehensive Health Care, and appropriate and complete Education, and rational National Security/Defense.

[SmileyRose]

11. Yes ma'am

I will work for the rich man until my fingers bleed if I get a fair and decent quality of life out of it. I don't mind that he's always going to be richer than me. But when the schmuck looks at me and says my sacrifice is worth less than my family's basic need - demands bleeding fingers and a broken back, then tells me I need more freedom rather a trip to the doctor, then I am tempted to do unspeakable things to the rich man and take by force what is stolen from me.

If the Republicans are correct, then standing up for what is rightfully mine makes a bad American and a bad person.

[patrice]

15. Amen to that! And truth be told, even without Labor, the group owes its members

a basic level of subsistence anyway for their cooperation with the social mores, customs, laws, and ethics of the group, because if the group doesn't owe simply for your cooperation, then doing WHATEVER to survive (rob, cheat, lie, murder etc.) makes ethical sense since you, apparently, are not a member of the group to begin with. Why should a group/society expect something (cooperation) for nothing?

So, though Labor ADDS REAL VALUE to the social contract, that contract is not a zero-sum, something or nothing, situation to begin with.

Yes, I am a Socialist; Society OWES me for my cooperation AND for my Labor.

[RufusTFirefly]

12. I think we're all entitled to adequate food, shelter, education, health care, and defense

Guess that makes me a socialist. Beyond that, if you want to make a fortune selling widgets, McMansions, iPods, or boob jobs, be my guest. It's the American way. Just don't leave me or my fellow citizens vulnerable or uninformed in the process.

[CrispyQ]

40. I would add child care to that list & call it complete.

:thumbsup:

Everyone's basic needs should be provided for. It's shameful that so many of our citizens are against this.

[SmileyRose]

81. Child care?

Yes, if our incomes are going to be depressed to the point both parents have no choice but to work then obviously affordable child care has to be in the mix somehow. But honestly, parents raising their kids is much preferable to day care, IMHO. Just MHO. And to do that we'll need to do something about income versus the ability to purchase basic services.

[CrispyQ]

85. Of course having parents raise their own children is preferable!

I didn't mean mandated child care, I meant availability of child care. Even if income weren't an issue, I can think of many incidents where a family may need help with child care.

[tblue]

14. At the townhall I went to, the teabaggers were asking why we hated capitalism.

As if they could even define it.

Bernie Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist. Works for me!

[patrice]

17. In their bible, The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith says that Labor is the primary form of Capital,

not money. Labor is basic capital, because it is Real Value. Money is not Real Value, especially today. Money is arbitrary abstract value. Today it is private bits and bytes, manipulated in private processes, by private computers; it is "worth" what its owners SAY it is worth.

Work does not insure employment. Jobs come and go with no relevance to the integrity or efforts of Workers. You are offered a paycheck representing those private bits and bytes at a value determined by others, not by you. What kind of choice is that? - the choice of A. or A. is not a choice. If there is no choice, what kind of economy is that? What good capitalist would engage in a deal in which something of Real Value is to be exchanged for something of arbitrary value and that's the only "choice" there is.

[POAS]

16. You should see the looks I get

when I tell people I'm a socialist.

[patrice]

18. That's because they erroneously think you want something for nothing and they don't realize

that THEY are accepting nothing for something.

[CrispyQ]

37. Nicely stated!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[tblue]

19. It's like saying you're an ax murderer.

It has such a negative connotation. And almost everyone with that reaction has no clue what it means. They don't even ask. They just know it's bad.

"Capitalism good!". Why? Why is it good???

[Echo In Light]

27. ..or, as a critic of Chomsky put it, & Chomsky then went on to use it to illustrate his point...

... if one espouses a view that's outside of, or is even a slight perceptive shift away from, the general, prevailing perceptions/ideologies brought about through cultural indoctrination, he says, (paraphrasing) "you may as well have come from Neptune." - - that one always gets a chuckle outta me

[patrice]

38. I think this is an excellent point. We must never under-estimate what others DON'T understand and

THAT lack of understanding should be the first task at hand.

[Echo In Light]

86. Disinformation, and Perception Management, are the key tools for control

[NotGivingUp]

20. well, i guess we should change the name to the socialist party. n/t

[patrice]

22. That'll be okay if we get to call that other party what it is: the Royalty Party.

[usregimechange]

21. I am not and it sounds like most of us are not as well, I guess the GOP plan worked.

[burning rain]

23. Heh. Well, we're all socialists in the teabaggers' sense...

that they call anything they don't like "socialism." But we really ought to push back against their foolishness, for the sake of the language and clear discourse. In a sentence, socialism is state ownership of the means of production and distribution. I.e. the state owns the factories, plants, farms, banks, railroads, trucking firms, construction firms, big stores, etc.

[SmileyRose]

24. The US is pretty much the exact opposite

and the Democratic Party is no threat to the ownership of our government by the factories, plants, farms, banks, railroads, trucking firms, construction firms, big stores, etc.

[burning rain]

25. Too true.

(And well turned, by the way.) I support public financing of political campaigns as a remedy.

[patrice]

42. I know many serious minded young adults who are asking the question you bring up here:

Do we turn our attention to the fact that our government IS owned by the private economic entities you list and seek reform through public financing of political campaigns?

- or -

Do we turn our backs on the corruption, walk away from that particular fight, and concentrate ALL of our efforts on creating our own NEW economic entities (hoping all the while that the corruption and the ultimate death throes of our political system do not flood and harm us and ours and hoping also that the physical environment in which all of this occurs gives us enough time to get up on our feet and run our own lives)?

I know some very intelligent, very strong, rather influential young people who are advocating for the latter.

[Chan790]

45. I'm preferenced towards 1a.

Where we turn our attention to the fact that our government IS owned by the private economic entities you list and seek reform through aggressive economic hedge warfare against the corporatists. The one thing I don't want is public financing of political campaigns as long as we can limit donors to individuals...that money talks too.

As much as primary voters, what turned the tide in the last democratic primary (and the last election) was the fact that Obama simply outspent and outraised both Clinton (and later McCain) by leagues. Financing by the public through individual voluntary means is an absolute check against the tyranny of the party leadership over the rank-and-file. Public finance is a back-door to greater uncheckable systemic control by the powers-that-be as it insulates them from the masses.

[patrice]

46. Pardon my ignorance about the distinction. Could you tell me more?

You are against Public Financing that limits donors to individuals.

Financing by the public through individual voluntary means - is not the same thing as Public Financing and is to be preferred to Public Financing because its success in 2008 demonstrates that it is a way around the tyranny of party leadership.

It is assumed that Public Financing would institutionalize the tyranny of party leadership, because ______________________ ? All funds would be distributed evenly?

I suspect there are some issues here about the differences between precisely what Public Financing turns out to be and what financing by the public actually is.

And since, in either case, most of the money goes to the media and media at least appears to have a disproportionate effect upon the knowledge base for voting decisions, the whole issue of who and what media is is relevant to the question of whether the status quo is preferable to reform.

[Chan790]

52. No, I'm against public finance as it is typically proposed...

...the only funder is the government and everybody gets the same money (once they pass some threshold of support as a party.)...individuals are also barred from donating.

Yes, because all funds would be distributed evenly...a fact which increases the selection power of the leadership as they now hold a greater sway over the outcome as the only major way left to really establish oneself as viable will be public endorsements...in a normative process those endorsement do not carry a lot of weight with the public (surveying has shown that. Newspapers either for the most part.)

However, a media always looking for someway to provide context and have something to report will have nothing else left to latch onto as an indicator of who is a viable candidate. The truth of our system is that most everybody is eliminated before the first primary ever takes place and barring individual voluntary funding is not going to change that. In the 2008 primary season, Hillary was the darling of party leaders (at first) because she appeared to be a shoo-in. Under a public funded system, Obama would have been dismissed as non-viable just like Kucinich, Gravel and Dodd by the media and resultantly in the eyes of "the people" long before New Hampshire.

[patrice]

47. P.S. It remains to be seen whether getting around the "tyranny of the party leadership" in 2008

having necessitated a dominant "move to the middle" CAN actually produce functional solutions and not just politically palatable moves that will ultimately proove to be too little too late.

[Chan790]

49. I'd concede that all...

we don't know. Frankly, it doesn't matter to me...I'm not willing to yield any portion of my limited decision-making power to them for better-or-worse. When we reach the point where we're facilitating allowing party apparatchik to make our decisions because it's better than allowing corporate interests to make our decisions, we've given up.

My only point was that in a public-financed system, the nominee would have been almost-certainly Hillary Clinton, a decision that looking back with what we know clearly would not have represented the majority of Democrats. It was only with grassroots support (and funding) that Obama was able to make the move from one also-run among a field of many vying to challenge the presumptive nominee, Clinton, to actually being the nominee. (Neither one of them was my choice...I voted for DK.) Further, a public-financed system puts all nominees on an equal-field (sounds great, right? It's not.) making the only truly-large organized variable-factor in the outcome of primaries the support of the insider-cadre...a force that is always going to go against the more-radical change elements of this party. Public financing doesn't make the nomination of someone liberal more likely, it makes it far less likely as a result.

Likewise, there was a window of time following the RNC convention where McCain pulled ahead briefly in polling. What many people don't realize is that at the same time the McCain campaign, riding a surge in support which was likely to be short and the popularity of their VP nominee, decided to throw much of their campaign treasure in at that point in an attempt to establish a foothold as they knew they did not have the resources to go $-for-$ down the stretch with Obama (who had far more money on-hand and was saving it for later in the race.) unless they could make themselves look viable, mobilize their base and get donations rolling in. That effort failed (in large part because Palin is a dunce and at the height of that effort revealed herself to be less-intelligent than the average American.), McCain did not have the funds on hand not only to compete down the stretch and the RNC had to divert funds out of local races to throw more into its' presidential nominee. That gambit by the McCain campaign to overcome the Democratic funds-advantage likely handed us a number of races down-ticket across the country. It may have changed the eventual outcome or not and it certainly changed the outcomes of a number of votes in this Congress.

Public financing changes everything...but not for the better. If your goal is to change the system and get corporate interests out of politics, proportional-representation marks a far more effective method of breaking the back of corporate interests as it breaks the back of the two party system and makes an viable faction again out of the left and the greens and it forces coalition governance.

[Chan790]

29. I'd support moving in that direction.

I cheered when we took over AIG because I thought "Finally, we're moving in that direction!" Then we agreed to re-privatize it if they paid off their debts.

I don't think we should nationalize everything...just commercial banks and insurance companies and maybe some essential industries: energy providers, defense contractors, transport, oil companies...and Monsanto. (Just so we can take Monsanto apart.)

[patrice]

41. There are many variations on and degrees of "ownership". I for one want

private ownership that is innovative, responsible, and cognizant that private ownership is NOT an absolute monarchy. To the extent that it exists at all, it must do so relative to other entities that ARE socially owned. And then the converse of this would also be true relative to social ownership.

Both private and social ownership can occur in many degrees, varying from 0 to 100% privately or socially owned.

The idea that Socialism is ONLY government 100% ownership of everything is dysfunctional.

It IS possible for the social entities who have (1-100%) ownership to be independent worker cooperatives or professional guilds and such.

[treestar]

26. True, but then we are allowing the right to shift the word's meaning

to what they claim it is. Socialism means the state owns the means of production. Right wingers never know this, or pretend not to, or claim that state regulation is the same as the state actually owning the businesses.

[a la izquierda]

28. baby, i'm a socialist!

and i love it!

[zenprole]

31. It's About Time

Very nice, SmileyRose. My favorite mental exercise is to deduce just how many forms of welfare a given right-winger is enjoying. I think Phil Gramm is the heavyweight champ, but even the most Ayn-Randed corporate libertarian is knee deep in public goods.

[StarfarerBill]

32. +1, and I take the teabaggers' derision as a point of pride.

Socialism is not a dirty word; neither is compassion.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[barbtries]

34. love it

can i put it on my blog? attributed of course.

[SmileyRose]

82. Fine by me.

I was venting mostly, but obviously, it had to be said.

[CrispyQ]

35. Jared Bernstein, VP Biden's economic adviser, says

that in a just society, there is no limit to how high one can climb, but there is a limit to how far one can fall. The WITTs (We're In This Together) want to pool money for a social safety net. The YOYOs (Your On Your Own) want everyone to provide their own safety net.

SR, I'm a damned evil socialist librul too!

[patrice]

43. The essential dysfunction of YOYOism is that it is inherently SUICIDAL.

No matter how "good" things may currently look, ultimately it MUST come to mutually assured destruction between competing YOYO economic entities. I saw a picture of a tattoo once that showed two stick figures with guns held to each other's head. The caption was "Capitalism" = the logical progression of Capitalism. We're at one stage of that now.

Cormac McCarthy's book The Road depicts (very Darkly, but also very Beautifully I might add) where absolute competition leads. I am looking forward to the movie with some trepidation. I will not reveal to you where the author comes down, personally, in the private:social dialectic.

[lonestarnot]

36. +++++

K & R

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

39. I think I'm leaning Socialist Democrat, so you guys can BLOW ME

:)

[Greyhound]

44. Once I read "Why I'm a Socialist", I was lost to the dog-eat-dog of American capitalism.

Never looked back and never regretted it.

[Hidden Stillness]

48. They Now Label as "Socialism" Everything They Used to Call Government Responsibiities

What is making this situation more and more incoherent, and harder to solve, is that since the corporate consolidation and takeover of all commercial media (leading to their ability to spew out non-stop floods of corporate/capitalist propaganda, unanswered no matter how stupid and easily knocked down it actually is), is that the way all these terms are used, has changed completely. Now, any support for Government regulation of big business, any calls for rich people to pay their fair share of taxes, is greeted with hoots of derision and fake horror, and all is called "extreme liberal/left wing." This used to be--and still is--the majority commonsense opinion out here in the real world.

Publicly paying for things, giving works-projects jobs to people, insuring control over the process and over powerful corporations--all these thigns were once considered ordinary thought, and people did not even "characterize" it. It was like--as opposed to what? Considering big business to be inherently corrupt, and a threat if not regulated by the people and their representative, the Government, was also, ordinary common sense. Now, since the corporate takeover of politics, again, you have to "justify" your every opinion on these issues once taken for granted. The whole notion that a "conservative" is someone who wants to shrink the size of Government and make it smaller, is so radical and extremist--it only used to be associated with the "lunatic fringe" like Barry Goldwater--that nobody used to put it that way. This is a total corruption, and extremist global-corporate recharacterization of very old terms that once meant something very different. Now, we aren't even allowed to think of corporations as something that can even legally be regulated, or all creativity will stop!

The corporate world is your enemy, but the Federal Government is no longer presumed to be our friend, since the huge infusion of corporate-lobbyist money has completely dislocated even the most basic aims and purposes of Government now.

"No business which depends for existence by paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country." Franklin Roosevelt, June 16, 1933
"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power." Franklin Roosevelt, 1938, proposing an investigation into commercial monopolies

Once ordinary, educated thought; now "extreme left-wing we have to compromise, bi-partisan, hurting business; socialism!"

[Shagbark Hickory]

50. I'm a communist. So there. I'm out now.

[and-justice-for-all]

51. I openly admit to it...they can kiss my Socialist ass!!

those greedy capitalist fuckwads!

[Buzz Clik]

53. "... if you think that means I don't love my fellow countrymen then FUCK YOU"

I love it! It's so DU.

[Mithreal]

54. K&R Funny how I never hear mention of Senator Sanders

when the wingnuts attack socialism. They aren't interested in talking facts anyway.

Kick and a rec with enthusiasm.

[penndragon69]

55. You betcha' i'm a socialist!

[PJPhreak]

56. As part of my being a Socialist...

I am having a blast giving a copy of these to the AntiSocialist Crowd and seeing if they will sign it.

Anti Socialism Purity Pledge

,I (Stick Freeper Name Here)________________________, do solemnly swear to uphold the principles of a socialism-free society and heretofore pledge my word that I shall strictly adhere to the following:

I will complain about the destruction of 1st Amendment Rights in this country, while I am duly being allowed to exercise my 1st Amendment Rights.

I will complain about the destruction of my 2nd Amendment Rights in this country, while I am duly being allowed to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights by legally but brazenly brandishing unconcealed firearms in public.

I will foreswear the time-honored principles of fairness, decency, and respect by screaming unintelligible platitudes regarding tyranny, Nazi-ism, and socialism at public town halls. Also.

I pledge to eliminate all government intervention in my life. I will abstain from the use of and participation in any socialist goods and services including but not limited to the following:

Social Security
Medicare/Medicaid
State Children’s Health Insurance Programs (SCHIP)
Police, Fire, and Emergency Services
US Postal Service
Roads and Highways
Air Travel (regulated by the socialist FAA)
The US Railway System
Public Subways and Metro Systems
Public Bus and Lightrail Systems
Rest Areas on Highways
Sidewalks
All Government-Funded Local/State Projects (e.g., see Iowa 2009 federal senate appropriations)
Public Water and Sewer Services (goodbye socialist toilet, shower, dishwasher, kitchen sink, outdoor hose!)
Public and State Universities and Colleges
Public Primary and Secondary Schools
Sesame Street
Publicly Funded Anti-Drug Use Education for Children
Public Museums
Libraries
Public Parks and Beaches
State and National Parks
Public Zoos
Unemployment Insurance
Municipal Garbage and Recycling Services
Treatment at Any Hospital or Clinic That Ever Received Funding From Local, State or Federal Government (pretty much all of them)
Medical Services and Medications That Were Created or Derived From Any Government Grant or Research Funding (again, pretty much all of them)
Socialist Byproducts of Government Investment Such as Duct Tape and Velcro (Nazi-NASA Inventions)
Use of the Internets, email, and networked computers, as the DoD's ARPANET was the basis for subsequent computer networking
Foodstuffs, Meats, Produce and Crops That Were Grown With, Fed With, Raised With or That Contain Inputs From Crops Grown With Government Subsidies
Clothing Made from Crops (e.g. cotton) That Were Grown With or That Contain Inputs From Government Subsidies
If a veteran of the government-run socialist US military, I will forego my VA benefits and insist on paying for my own medical care

I will not tour socialist government buildings like the Capitol in Washington, D.C.

I pledge to never take myself, my family, or my children on a tour of the following types of socialist locations, including but not limited to:

Smithsonian Museums such as the Air and Space Museum or Museum of American History
The socialist Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson Monuments
The government-operated Statue of Liberty
The Grand Canyon
The socialist World War II and Vietnam Veterans Memorials
The government-run socialist-propaganda location known as Arlington National Cemetery
All other public-funded socialist sites, whether it be in my state or in Washington, DC
I will urge my Member of Congress and Senators to forego their government salary and government-provided healthcare.

I will oppose and condemn the government-funded and therefore socialist military of the United States of America.

I will boycott the products of socialist defense contractors such as GE, Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, Raytheon, Humana, FedEx, General Motors, Honeywell, and hundreds of others that are paid by our socialist government to produce goods for our socialist army.

I will protest socialist security departments such as the Pentagon, FBI, CIA, Department of Homeland Security, TSA, Department of Justice and their socialist employees.

Upon reaching eligible retirement age, I will tear up my socialist Social Security checks.

Upon reaching age 65, I will forego Medicare and pay for my own private health insurance until I die.

SWORN ON A BIBLE AND SIGNED THIS DAY OF __________ IN THE YEAR ___.

_____________ _________________________

Signed Printed Name/Town and State


Watching their heads explode is Great Fun!

[SmileyRose]

84. LOL - sworn on a bible....

:rofl:

[kixat2550]

57. Good for you man

[varelse]

58. People do tend to forget

just how dependent the economy of *any* nation is on its public infrastructure. Schools, roads, law enforcement and in most developed nations, medical care form the foundation on which the "free market" economy grows.

[Unvanguard]

59. I tend to think that calling something "socialist" is rather like calling it "a really good idea"

and as in general, so with respect to health care...

[greengestalt]

60. Socialism is what a society is about

We band together in larger groups than tribes to protect and support ourselves to be better off than animals. You accept more work that goes to others in exchange for others doing the same and thus you all are sheltered and even if all are poor, none go hungry or too cold.


The base of "Society" itself is "Socialism", aeons before Marx. It's just that over time, some pigs thought themselves "Most Equal" and unbalanced the thing to favor themselves while at the cost of leaving some no better, often worse than if they'd stayed 'tribesmen'.


The "Sawney Beane" clan is the logical extreme of Ayn Rand Libertarianism or "Anarcho Capitalism".

[pitchforksandtorches]

61. Is that like being a fucking Pinko?

[WillyT]

62. Hear, Hear !!! - K & R !!!

:applause::yourock::applause:

:kick:

[maxpower]

63. Fuck yeah.

Kicked

[susanr516]

64. Me too, SmileyRose

k&r

[gratefultobelib]

65. Wonderful post! I'm saving it forever!!

[DesertFlower]

66. me too. i'm a proud socialist.

[RoccoR5955]

67. I've been a proud Liberal Socialist all of my adult life.

I do not work for corporations, I shop locally whenever possible, I believe that the most good can be done for all of us when we all contribute.

[CANDO]

68. God damn right!

All you filthy conservatives out there need to understand this one point; what's mine is mine, and what's yours is also mine! So go fuck yourselves, I'm a SOCIALIST! That's some funny shit right there. If you don't think that's funny, you get the hell outa' here!

[Fire1sKid]

70. I am a socialist as well and damn proud of it

One of the reasons that I am a socialist is because I believe that there is no reason that any entertainer (athlete,actor,etc.)should make more than a fucking doctor or even the president of The United States.

[Riverman]

71. Right up there with the Best Post Ever on DU!

And, if the dumb assess don't get it, then Fuck 'em. Need a cop, call pinhead Beck. Need an ambulance, call that lyin' evil Palin to fly in her chopper to save you - oh no, she can't - too busy taking target practice on innocent wolves! Need an EMT, call fat-fuck Limpballs,who has his private stash of morphine-like drugs. Won't cure you, but will keep you numb while BofA or Chase drains your back account!

[lib2DaBone]

72. Isn't it funny.. Socialism is OK as long as it benefits the Big Banks...

Insurance Companies and Wall Street?

Let a few crumbs fall of the table to the taxpayers who are footing the bill.. and OMG.. IT"S SOCIALISM!!!

[winyanstaz]

73. I say if socialism means that Americans help take care of each other.....

and we all benifit as a nation..I am all for it.

[Libertas1776]

74. K&R!!!

This OP calls for a little Internationale (Billy Bragg Version)

"Stand up, all victims of oppression,
For the tyrants fear your might!
Don't cling so hard to your possessions,
For you have nothing if you have no rights!
Let racist ignorance be ended,
For respect makes the empires fall!
Freedom is merely privilege extended,
Unless enjoyed by one and all.
So come brothers and sisters,
For the struggle carries on.
The Internationale,
Unites the world in song.
So comrades, come rally,
For this is the time and place!
The international ideal,
Unites the human race."

[donheld]

75. me too

[DesertDiamond]

76. Isn't the wellbeing of the people the primary reason for having a governmenta at all?

[leftstreet]

77. That's a very good question

Welcome to DU

[Greyhound]

87. The only reason.

"Consent of the governed" implies the ability to withdraw consent and absent that, we are merely subservient enablers.

[BobTheSubgenius]

78. Yes. Fuck us. Fuck us one and all.

K and f'ing R

[defendandprotect]

79. k i c k

[inna]

80. kick

:kick:

[Better Believe It]

83. K & R