jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (33 posts)

Are Liberals "Useful Idiots"?

  1. lady_love158 profile image59
    lady_love158posted 5 years ago

    http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2004/09 … -the-left/

    A very interesting take on this question written back in 2004 sheds some light on the term and perhaps will convince liberals that they are really tools of forces that have long desired to achieve the destruction of capitalism and cobsequently America.

    1. habee profile image89
      habeeposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      I'm curious, LL. Would you like to do away with all social programs? I'm not a liberal, but I totally believe we need some social programs.

      1. lady_love158 profile image59
        lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

        I think we could do away with all of them and then perhaps address the truly needy and helpless. Most of these social programs are best addressed by charities and churches.

        1. Cagsil profile image62
          Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          That's the problem....the "churches" and "charities" are not doing their part as it is, so what in the world would make you think that their actions would change with the elimination of the social programs in place?

          Apparently, you haven't thought it out. What else is new. roll

          1. lady_love158 profile image59
            lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Who says they're not? You? And you can prove this? Or is your insulting tone supposed be show that you are a knowlegable expert?

            1. Cagsil profile image62
              Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Sure, look up any study on the Charitable organizations and non-profits in America and you'll find out that they don't even meet up with Federal Regulations, which shows off the corruption between companies and government, and also shows how little these types of companies, including "churches", are not actually help ENOUGH of the citizens.

              I found one study done on the TOP 200 U.S. based Charities and Non-profit companies...and NOT ONE was within the requirement. So what in the world would make you think it would change?

              As for my insulting tone, you should seriously eliminate your negative thinking. It's not about politics and it's NOT about me or you. It's about what is in the best interest of the citizens, which apparently you are not interested in.

              1. lady_love158 profile image59
                lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

                So you're relying on the government bureaucracy to tell you how corrupt charities are really??
                Here is one story I found:
                http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/200 … able_N.htm

                Americans gave 295 billion to charity in 2007 and over 70% of it came from individuals! Imagine how much more it could be if we were allowed to keep more of our money?
                And what makes you think the government is without waste, abuse, and corruption? What makes you think they can take your money and redistribute it more efficiently than charities?

                1. Cagsil profile image62
                  Cagsilposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  No, I'm not relying on government bureaucracy to tell me anything. The survey/study done was independent and not funded by government or government money.
                  And take a look at how things have gotten worse? If that doesn't tell you something, then I don't know what will.

        2. bgamall profile image85
          bgamallposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I suggest the agenda to do away with medicare will ruin the Tea Party and may make the Republican Party irrelevant for years to come.

          When push comes to shove, even in Nevada the bozo that hates medicare is having big trouble in his campaign. And that is in a conservative state.

        3. bgamall profile image85
          bgamallposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          You have enough money lady love to fund your medical when you are too old to post the BS that you are posting here? Tell us how your finances will look.

          Or should we put you behind a horse on a thatched mat like the Indians did and send you out into the wilderness?

          1. lady_love158 profile image59
            lady_love158posted 5 years ago in reply to this

            Medicare was enacted in the 60s, so are you saying up until that time we just dragged old people off into the wilderness? Really? And social security is just our money being taken away from us by force and the decision to invest it being made by faceless bureaucrats that leave us with IOUs that might one day may be worthless. I'd rather hold onto MY money thanks.

            1. Average American profile image61
              Average Americanposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Great point. It always makes me laugh when the left forgets history started before their birth, or before the great society.

  2. TMMason profile image73
    TMMasonposted 5 years ago

    Yes.

    Useful idiots... is about the nicest thing I call them.

    1. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

      better than useless right wing idiots though.

      1. TMMason profile image73
        TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

        What do you mean you? You are quite useful in our discussions of Socialist/Marxist/Communist idiology, don't sell yourself short.

        But then again all you all are quire funny in your understandings of that ideology.

        As if the means used to gain central authority and collectivism -"state ownership"- changes a damn thing as to the end result.

        They are all Marx' demented children in the end, from Lenin to Stalin, Hitler to Musolinni, the neo-Socialists of Europe to their neo-Commie counterparts.

        You are all the same in the end.

        1. John Holden profile image60
          John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

          I'm not into state ownership, I'm into ownership by the people. Not the few who can afford to invest substantially on the stock market but worker ownership.

          PS,Hitler wasn't a socialist.

          1. TMMason profile image73
            TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

            That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard someone repeat.

            Tell me agian how we all own and operate it, without the use of some controling body to function in that capacity/

            You cannot.

            The "People" is a nice euphemism... but in the end the "people" are represented by some body, in some form... and that would be Govt.

            And we have already settled the last point with facts... so accept it and move on.

            1. John Holden profile image60
              John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

              Look at the many successful cooperatives in the UK, many worker owned, none government controlled.

              1. TMMason profile image73
                TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                And who controls the workers aspect?  Unions? Have you looked at the structure of a Union? Not to far from a Govt.. And we all know the Commies control the Unions...

                so?... that sort of proves my point about in the end.

                And profit sharing is not the same as full owner-ship and control rights.

                1. John Holden profile image60
                  John Holdenposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                  No, unions don't control the workers aspect, the workers do!
                  Which just about totally disproves your point.

                  And it's not only about profit sharing, which happens right across the board, not only in cooperatives, it is full ownership and control.

                  I know that is must be hard for those of a narrow view to grasp but it does work, often a lot more successfully than conventional businesses.

                  1. TMMason profile image73
                    TMMasonposted 5 years ago in reply to this

                    No Unions in England? Your going to tell me there are no workers unions, or groups that act as such, in England? Your going to tell me that the unions do not negotiate for every last aspect of pay, benis, etc?...

                    Okay... I do not know if I should believe that. But if you insist there are no Unions in England.

                    And the only narrow-mindedness I see is when individuals claim the means to an end, change an objective from what it is, to something it isn't.

                    And I do not doubt that some of those ideas will work on a small scale.

                    You know all you leftists are a riot... you all love the people so much.. untill a majority of the people don't want to vote your way... then you all run out of legislatures, and scream racist hatred... so as to thwart the will of the people.

                    You all never cease to amaze me... never.

  3. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    A pseudo-conservative, an idiot's idiot.

  4. secularist10 profile image90
    secularist10posted 5 years ago

    In a word, yes. As are conservatives. Both are pawns in the narrow-minded ideological game of their puppet-masters.

    As for destroying capitalism and America, I find this slightly hyperbolic (just a tad), since there are thousands of people starting businesses every day in this country, monetary exchange continues unabated, private property remains upheld and prices are still set by primarily market forces.

    The foundation of capitalism is market exchange and private property. Do we still have market exchange? Yes. Do we still have private property? Yes.

    Therefore capitalism is not dead.

    Get a grip, people.

  5. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    Yes I am moron with Alzheimers to boot.

 
working