DUmmy Raven Mystified By Opposition To Socialism

[GOBUCKS]

Raven  (1000+ posts)      Sun Aug-09-09 11:31 AM
Original message
How would someone come to the conclusion that their government
wants them dead and subjected to communism or socialism and invasion of their privacy?
I've been trying to figure out where this comes from. How these disrupters come to have such an awful opinion of their government. Here is what I think is a the bottom of this:

These people are not wealthy. They have been plugging along getting nowhere and watching the rich get richer. They have seen their retirement accounts decimated, watched their government send countless kids off to be killed in illegal wars, wondered about illegal wiretaps and intrusions on citizens' privacy and generally, they have watched a lying and corrupt government in action. No wonder they are upset and mistrustful.

They are expecting Barack Obama to conduct business in the very same way that Bush and Cheney did.

 
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6259162

I don't know, DUmmy Raven, how would any of the past victims of socialists and communists have come to that conclusion?
The people opposing your jug-eared Kenyan socialist strongly supported President Bush. They are just smarter than you.
By the way, did that boy of yours ever get a job?

[Chris_]

Ya know......I can't understand why our simple ideology seems so incomprehensible to them........

......We don't want government involved in our health care......period, this is between us and our medical professionals.

......We don't think that it is anyone's business how many firearms we own, or what type of vehicle we drive. or what house we live in, or where we choose to send our children to school, or what we choose to teach them at home.

......We will always resist efforts to pass laws that will ultimately force changes in our lifestyles.......if we are unhappy with our lifestyles, we will change them ourselves.  Voting for representatives who believe as we do is not "voting against our own self interest".

.....We don't object to paying our "fair share" of taxes to provide for our government, so long as that government does not use those taxes to intrude on our individual wellbeing, and the liberties that we enjoy.

.....We are happy to contribute to efforts to benefit those less fortunate than we........however we will resist doing so at the point of a gun, or under the threat of punitive action by the government.

.....The concept set fourth by the founders that "All men are created equal".....stops at "created", from that point on, equality ends, except for those benefits and rights enshrined in our Constitution........we grow and accomplish different things in life, and it is not the governments role to guarantee "equality of outcomes", because if it is attempted, it always comes at the expense of someone else.

In short, we basically expect the government to "leave us alone" to conduct our lives as we see fit in peace, so long as we do not infringe on the lives of our fellow countrymen.........

Why are these simple precepts so difficult for them to understand?????

doc

[GOBUCKS]

Ya know......I can't understand why our simple ideology seems so incomprehensible to them........

Their ideology is even simpler:

We have stuff. They want stuff.

[Carl]

No,you cretin fool...we understand human nature and the history of how this has worked before.
It is you that turns a blind eye to everything you don`t like so as to keep believing that you can visit a doctor everyday and never have to worry about working again.
That is what it boils down to,breaking the association we have now of health insurance and employment.

[Chris_]

Their ideology is even simpler:

We have stuff. They want stuff.

No one is stopping them from getting stuff the same way that we did.........

doc

[Vagabond]

No,you cretin fool...we understand human nature and the history of how this has worked before.
It is you that turns a blind eye to everything you don`t like so as to keep believing that you can visit a doctor everyday and never have to worry about working again.
That is what it boils down to,breaking the association we have now of health insurance and employment.

I'd like to see a simplified system for health insurance myself.  Why can't a group of citizens form a group?  Why should it cost more to buy a policy by yourself than it does for a group?  Even more simply, why is it that to buy health insurance means you have to have "Cadillac health insurance"?

Why does the government force citizens to pay for coverage for things they either don't need or could pay for out of pocket at a lower overall cost?

My General Practitioner sees me twice a year, I'm willing to pay for those visits up front in cash, it would be cheaper for me, her, and ultimately the insurance company.  The regulations in Maryland say we can't make that sort of arrangement so long as I have insurance.  I don't need a chiropracter, if I do need one it is likely to already have cost me more in insurance than simply paying one would.  Maryland says chiropracter care has to be covered.  Regulations that are lobbied into existence are more responsible for the cost of health insurance than any other factor.

We may need some government regulations regarding how people with preexisting conditions are handled, but by and large government regulation has created a mess.  More regulation of this nature, even government takeover, will only make it worse.

Any DUmmies got a pair big enough to respond?

[jukin]

Because what communism and communism-lite do is kill people and those that it does not kill it makes miserable. 

Seen it before but coming again:

The worst genocides of the 20th Century
Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) 49-78,000,000
Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39) 23,000,000 (the purges plus Ukraine's famine)
Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945) 12,000,000 (concentration camps and civilians WWII)
Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44) 5,000,000 (civilians in WWII)
Ismail Enver (Turkey, 1915-20) 1,200,000 Armenians (1915) + 350,000 Greek Pontians and 480,000 Anatolian Greeks (1916-22) + 500,000 Assyrians (1915-20)
Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79) 1,700,000
Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94) 1.6 million (purges and concentration camps)
Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78) 1,500,000
Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970) 1,000,000
Leonid Brezhnev (Afghanistan, 1979-1982) 900,000
Jean Kambanda (Rwanda, 1994) 800,000
Suharto (East Timor, West Papua, Communists, 1966-98) 800,000
Saddam Hussein (Iran 1980-1990 and Kurdistan 1987-88) 600,000
Tito (Yugoslavia, 1945-1987) 570,000
Fumimaro Konoe (Japan, 1937-39) 500,000? (Chinese civilians)
Jonas Savimbi (Angola, 1975-2002) 400,000
Mullah Omar - Taliban (Afghanistan, 1986-2001) 400,000
Idi Amin (Uganda, 1969-1979) 300,000
Yahya Khan (Pakistan, 1970-71) 300,000 (Bangladesh)
Benito Mussolini (Ethiopia, 1936; Yugoslavia, WWII) 300,000
Mobutu Sese Seko (Zaire, 1965-97) ?
Charles Taylor (Liberia, 1989-1996) 220,000
Foday Sankoh (Sierra Leone, 1991-2000) 200,000
Slobodan Milosevic (Yugoslavia, 1992-96) 180,000
Michel Micombero (Burundi, 1972) 150,000
Hassan Turabi (Sudan, 1989-1999) 100,000
Jean-Bedel Bokassa (Centrafrica, 1966-79) ?
Richard Nixon (Vietnam, 1969-1974) 70,000 (vietnamese civilians)
Efrain Rios Montt (Guatemala, 1982-83) 70,000
Papa Doc Duvalier (Haiti, 1957-71) 60,000
Hissene Habre (Chad, 1982-1990) 40,000
Chiang Kai-shek (Taiwan, 1947) 30,000 (popular uprising)
Vladimir Ilich Lenin (USSR, 1917-20) 30,000 (dissidents executed)
Francisco Franco (Spain) 30,000 (dissidents executed after the civil war)
Fidel Castro (Cuba, 1959-1999) 30,000
Lyndon Johnson (Vietnam, 1963-1968) 30,000
Hafez Al-Assad (Syria, 1980-2000) 25,000
Khomeini (Iran, 1979-89) 20,000
Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe, 1982-87, Ndebele minority) 20,000
Rafael Videla (Argentina, 1976-83) 13,000
Guy Mollet (France, 1956-1957) 10,000 (war in Algeria)
Paul Koroma (Sierra Leone, 1997) 6,000
Osama Bin Laden (worldwide, 1993-2001) 3,500
Augusto Pinochet (Chile, 1973) 3,000
Al Zarqawi (Iraq, 2004-06) 2,000

It's not the people IT'S THE SYSTEM!!

[The Village Idiot]

How would someone come to the conclusion that their government
wants them dead and subjected to communism or socialism and invasion of their privacy?

Huh? I don't even think that qualifies as english.

Let me put it this way,

because its true.

[GOBUCKS]

Maryland says chiropracter care has to be covered.  Regulations that are lobbied into existence are more responsible for the cost of health insurance than any other factor.

Wow. How about aromatherapy and acupuncture? If taxpayers foot the bill for quackery, no one shold be left out.

[GOBUCKS]

No one is stopping them from getting stuff the same way that we did.........
doc

Nope. We got it by working for it. At the DUmp that idea is a non-starter.

Also, their Theory of Stuff is that there's a finite amount of stuff, and we already have it.

[Chris_]

Nope. We got it by working for it. At the DUmp that idea is a non-starter.

Also, their Theory of Stuff is that there's a finite amount of stuff, and we already have it.

The "Zero sum Theory of Stuff"..........

Musta missed that one during my academic adventures...........

doc

[Carl]

I'd like to see a simplified system for health insurance myself.  Why can't a group of citizens form a group?  Why should it cost more to buy a policy by yourself than it does for a group?  Even more simply, why is it that to buy health insurance means you have to have "Cadillac health insurance"?

Why does the government force citizens to pay for coverage for things they either don't need or could pay for out of pocket at a lower overall cost?

My General Practitioner sees me twice a year, I'm willing to pay for those visits up front in cash, it would be cheaper for me, her, and ultimately the insurance company.  The regulations in Maryland say we can't make that sort of arrangement so long as I have insurance.  I don't need a chiropracter, if I do need one it is likely to already have cost me more in insurance than simply paying one would.  Maryland says chiropracter care has to be covered.  Regulations that are lobbied into existence are more responsible for the cost of health insurance than any other factor.

We may need some government regulations regarding how people with preexisting conditions are handled, but by and large government regulation has created a mess.  More regulation of this nature, even government takeover, will only make it worse.

Any DUmmies got a pair big enough to respond?

What you are talking about is health care based on an "as needed" presumption and that is the difference.
What they seek is health care "as wanted" which creates a problem with availability and costs.

The whole issue of liability is another thing and I have yet to hear one word how any of the bills being put forth by the dems even recognizes how that drives up costs much less addresses it.

[BlueStateSaint]

Their ideology is even simpler:

We have our stuff. They want our stuff.

Fixed.

[Vagabond]

What you are talking about is health care based on an "as needed" presumption and that is the difference.
What they seek is health care "as wanted" which creates a problem with availability and costs.

The whole issue of liability is another thing and I have yet to hear one word how any of the bills being put forth by the dems even recognizes how that drives up costs much less addresses it.

That is ultimately one of the rocks this whole mess is going to dash itself to pieces on.  You can't get any healthcare reform without tort reform.  There is just no way lawyers, what congress critters mostly are, are going to turn off that particular money spigot for their profession.

[miskie]

No one is stopping them from getting stuff the same way that we did.........

doc

This sort of thing just pisses me off :

I work six days a week, then come home to man the webhosting business. The Mrs. works five days a week, and works opposite hours from me because we have three young kids who cant fend for themselves. My big night out is usually on Saturday night, and since the wife works then, my night out involves my brother and parents coming over to play a few rounds of Pinochle, since I cant leave - Re: Kids.

Maybe once every two months we manage to cajole some babysitting out of someone so the Missus and I can escape to see a movie and have dinner.

Anyway ,we do this to pay the bills, and to insure our own are cared for. -- Not because we 'like' it. (Don't get me wrong, I would never change family life)  --  But the fact is people I'm not responsible for expect me to pay for them via taxes to the government. It's insulting. [/soapbox]

[franksolich]

One has to understand where the simple-minded simple-mindedness of the cross-bearing carpetbagging maternal ancestress of the Bostonian Drunkard is coming from.

During the last half of the '40s, and all through the '50s and '60s, she was a rich little girl, the apple of her father's eye.  Even though her father doted on her, he was a traditionalist.  The sons were prepared for the law business, but the daughter was to marry a blue-blooded attorney.

The normal rebellion; the cross-bearing carpetbagging maternal ancestress thought herself as good as her brothers, which perhaps she was.  Rejection of dad's Republican politics, of dad's Irish Roman Catholicism, of dad's materialism, of dad's big plans for her.

Ooops, did I say "rejection of dad's materialism"?

I misspoke; of course she rejected not the affluence and wealth bestowed upon her by her father.  She had no intention of living in austerity.

She did however instead of marrying a blue-blooded State Street attorney, married an obscure attorney from Alabama, and gave the world the gift of the Bostonian Drunkard.

When the Bostonian Drunkard was still a wee little lad, in the manner of Dan and Marilyn Quayle, the cross-bearing carpetbagging maternal ancestress attended night law-school classes, and got her degree, to show dad she was as good as her brothers, which she perhaps is, or was.

Seeking to avoid the consequences of her own voting record--high taxes, high crime, high illiteracy, congestion, filth, squalor, dirt, corruption--she escaped to then-Republican New Hampshire and became city attorney of a small town there.

As a resident of New Hampshire, she pig-headedly persists in voting the same ways she had voted in Massachusetts, hoping to turn that place too into another cesspool like her native state, refusing to see that it was people such as her who made her native state into a cesspool to begin with.

One reasonably assumes that once New Hampshire becomes saturated with high taxes, crime, illiteracy, congestion, filt, squalor, dirt, corruption, since she has the material means to do so, she will then transfer to another pristine state, and vote to soil that one too.  (Not all people have the means to escape hellholes, and they are the biggest victims of the cross-bearing carpetbagging maternal ancestress; she forces them to live in the shithouse while she goes off to some place cleaner, nicer.)

The cross-bearing carpetbagging maternal ancestress, while she has always readily accepted the largesse given by her late father, seems to have never inquired into its source.  One wonders why.

[DixieBelle]

Damn, you are good Frank.

[Airwolf]

Ya know......I can't understand why our simple ideology seems so incomprehensible to them........

......We don't want government involved in our health care......period, this is between us and our medical professionals.

......We don't think that it is anyone's business how many firearms we own, or what type of vehicle we drive. or what house we live in, or where we choose to send our children to school, or what we choose to teach them at home.

......We will always resist efforts to pass laws that will ultimately force changes in our lifestyles.......if we are unhappy with our lifestyles, we will change them ourselves.  Voting for representatives who believe as we do is not "voting against our own self interest".

.....We don't object to paying our "fair share" of taxes to provide for our government, so long as that government does not use those taxes to intrude on our individual wellbeing, and the liberties that we enjoy.

.....We are happy to contribute to efforts to benefit those less fortunate than we........however we will resist doing so at the point of a gun, or under the threat of punitive action by the government.



.....The concept set fourth by the founders that "All men are created equal".....stops at "created", from that point on, equality ends, except for those benefits and rights enshrined in our Constitution........we grow and accomplish different things in life, and it is not the governments role to guarantee "equality of outcomes", because if it is attempted, it always comes at the expense of someone else.

In short, we basically expect the government to "leave us alone" to conduct our lives as we see fit in peace, so long as we do not infringe on the lives of our fellow countrymen.........

Why are these simple precepts so difficult for them to understand?????

doc

Because we are evil greedy Rethugs and deserve to be treated no better then a civil war ear slave or like the Nazi's treated the Jews in 1939-1945. They think they are so much smarter then us and that we will submit to whatever crazy batshit idea they create. As for us I say NO. We will keep following the laws as they are written in the Bill Of Rights and The Constitution. We will not let this country fall into the hands of a dictator just because he speaks well and has a teleprompter to make it easy for him to follow the bouncing ball. The last guy that was like this nearly set the world on fire trying to take it over from Germany.

[USA4ME]

Raven

How would someone come to the conclusion that their government wants them dead and subjected to communism or socialism and invasion of their privacy? I've been trying to figure out where this comes from. How these disrupters come to have such an awful opinion of their government. Here is what I think is a the bottom of this:

These people are not wealthy. They have been plugging along getting nowhere and watching the rich get richer. They have seen their retirement accounts decimated, watched their government send countless kids off to be killed in illegal wars, wondered about illegal wiretaps and intrusions on citizens' privacy and generally, they have watched a lying and corrupt government in action. No wonder they are upset and mistrustful.

They are expecting Barack Obama to conduct business in the very same way that Bush and Cheney did.

When the raven primitive completely misses the boat in her "what I think is a the bottom of this"  in her attempt to define those opposed to Dear Leader's health initiative, then naturally she's going to reach the wrong conclusions.  A least we know where her son gets his "smarts" from, because he just makes up the symptoms and draws irrelevant conclusions, too.

Here's it for me:  I don't trust liberals.  They've lied way too many times for me to believe a single thing they say.  I'm betting a lot of the people at these meeting have had the same expreiences.  The primitives have yet to realize that when they consistently lie, it doesn't build any trust with those who have been consistently lied to by liberals.  Liberals need to quit lying and maybe after 50-100 years they can be trusted again.

.

[Chris_]

Here's it for me:  I don't trust liberals.  They've lied way too many times for me to believe a single thing they say.  I'm betting a lot of the people at these meeting have had the same expreiences.  The primitives have yet to realize that when they consistently lie, it doesn't build any trust with those who have been consistently lied to by liberals.  Liberals need to quit lying and maybe after 50-100 years they can be trusted again.

.

The problem with your conclusions are......if liberals stop lying about their ideas and agenda, no sane person would ever vote for one of them........lying about their intentions is, so far, the key to their success......and hoping that the public is suficiently disconnected to remember.

doc

[kenth]

Their ideology is even simpler:

We have stuff. They want stuff.

Yep, that's socialism in a nutshell. The entire concept of socialism is simplistic and childish in reasoning. For socialism to work, we would have to darn near be perfect. I don't know how one could get to adulthood and believe that's possible. We're all flawed. Our flaws are the reason we need to agree to abide by rules with each other. It's the reason we need a monetary system.

It boils down to your quote. They want stuff, but they don't want to work for it. They are immature and think that it's "Unfair!" when others have something that they don't, whether it's a child's game or health insurance.