Philosophy of Rights

[U201491]

All right.

I've tried to deal with you. I've tried very, very hard to be calm and rational, and to treat you all like adults. A few of you actually know what you're talking about very well. To those few I have this to say.

Your talents and intellect are utterly wasted here. You understand things that many here are utterly unable to comprehend. You could go on to publish books, to open minds, to challenge others to think. If you went out and discussed philosophy, discussed Hobbes and Locke with anti-gunners, they would be forced to realize their ideas about gun owners are wrong.

And to the rest of you, you support their stereotype. You have absolutely no idea of what Marxism really is or of Communism. Yet you talk about it all the time. It's like the child who hears his parents talking and immediately adopts their opinions, parroting them to other children and acting as if they are more intelligent for it. If any of you had actually studied Marxist theory you would know there are no Communist states, because the term is an oxymoron. But instead you rush around full of cold war propaganda. And the worst thing is that you're so reactionary that merely seeing another human being with a different political view necessitates you always talking about that, going off topic, always trying to bring it up, always trying to slander, to harass, and hijacking what was a very interesting thread before your arrival.

I don't know how to explain you. At best you're ancient relics of the propaganda system. At worst, you're complete idiots who believe whatever you're told by someone with a flag. Either way, I pity you. But I'm mostly disgusted.

You get what you want. I'm out of here. I've given you far more patience than you deserve.

What a self serving arrogant self righteous bozo.
There are people here that you belittle that have more
intelligence in their toenail than you spout that you have.
They have lived what you only read about.
Might be a bit late to inform you, but you landed on the wrong continent.
But I am not really sure where OZ is.
You have gall though. Way too much of it.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

oh i agree it is not many a people that understand that our form of republic is based on cromwells republic, taht no man be under any LAW he him self did not put HIMSELF under

"Bind Him Down from Mischief by the Chains of the Constitution" ~ Thomas Jefferson

 

[BoonDocks36]

What a self serving arrogant self righteous bozo.

Hey, I knew Bozo, This kid E's no Bozo ...

And RedCap.... that was pure fun! I love the Simplicity of that Utube.... " Well bye"

philip

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I've met redcap, he's down home

 

[U201491]

[video=youtube_share;PVrEwCa8nSA]http://youtu.be/PVrEwCa8nSA[/video]

Perfect...

 

[BoonDocks36]

Salted Weapon, excellent post!!! It caused me to think, and I am still on Mountain Brewed Coffee Cup #1...

Another example, but, SW, ~much~ Closer to home....

luke23 originated this thread, an avowed communist.

Let us call this very Thread, active communism in real time, right now.

All of us, there fore, shall be considered, active communists, for the purpose* of this thread.

Our glorious Comrade Leader, luke1, has told us the purpose of the thread. He has said "Well Done Comrade" for the propper response(s).

Then* somehow, an off putting post was made! Comrade LukeOne, said "Nay, Comrade, listen again".

And propperly oriented Comrades said, "Da, Comrade".... And Comrade Luke ONE, was happy, Da!

And, again* some one Questioned the Authority, LUKE ONE.

COMRADE Luke UnoSupreme, emphatically, "No, (c)omrade, No"!!!!

and the Da Comrades Cheered, SAVIOR LUKE ZIE SUPREME LEADER.

And all was well.... *

Then another disident said "??????????????????"

And the ONLY PERSON who had the Correct Answer(s) said: "How dare you QUESTION, my Kind, Gentle, LEADERSHIP!!! You are ALL BANNED from this Country, Now, and ~I must now, Pout~ so I leave you in your Obvious Misery....

* and the honest working citizens, completed a Coup de Gra, and celibrated the overthrow, of another Communist Thread.

Three Cheers Comrades. Oops. Three Cheers Free Citizens!!!

Hurrah! Hurrah!!! HURRAH!!!!

philip

 

[U201491]

Communism and Marxism....There is no good outcome.......None, except revolution and abolishment and formation of Free States.
Most people in the US have no comprehension of what it is, especially the youth that have been fed some OZ illusion of what is no more than fantasy, and not reality at all.
The education system today is the "Jim Jones" of America. Kool Aid of death.
We had better begin to fight this subversion in earnest and with tenacity if our country is to have any chance of survival !
--------------------------------------------------------------


Political repression
Large-scale political repression under communist rule has been the subject of extensive historical research by scholars and activists from a diverse range of perspectives. A number of researchers on this subject are former Eastern bloc communists who become disillusioned with their ruling parties, such as Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev and Dmitri Volkogonov. Similarly, Jung Chang, one of the authors of Mao: The Unknown Story, was a Red Guard in her youth. Others are disillusioned former Western communists, including several of the authors of The Black Book of Communism. Robert Conquest, another former communist, became one of the best-known writers on the Soviet Union following the publication of his influential account of the Great Purg in The Great Terror, which at first was not well received in some left-leaning circles of Western intellectuals. Following the end of the Cold War, much of the research on this topic has focused on state archives previously classified under communist rule.

The level of political repression experienced in states under communist rule varied widely between different countries and historical periods. The most rigid censorship was practiced by the Soviet Union under Stalin (1927–53), China under Mao during the Cultural Revolution (1966–76), and the communist regime in North Korea throughout its rule (1948–present).[2] Under Stalin's rule, political repression in the Soviet Union included executions of Great Purge victims and peasants deemed "kulaks" by state authorities; the Gulag system of forced labor camps; deportations of ethnic minorities; and mass starvations during the Soviet famine of 1932-34, caused by either government mismanagement, or by some accounts, caused deliberately. The Black Book of Communism also details the mass starvations resulting from Great Leap Forward in China, and the Killing Fields in Cambodia.

Although political repression in the USSR was far more extensive and severe in its methods under Stalin's rule than in any other period, authors such as Richard Pipes, Orlando Figes, and works such as the Black Book of Communism argue that a reign of terror began within Russia under the leadership of Vladimir Lenin immediately after the October Revolution, and continued by the Red Army and the Cheka over the country during the Russian Civil War. It included summary executions of hundreds of thousands of "class enemies" by Cheka; the development of the system of labor camps, which would later lay the foundation for the Gulags; and a policy of food requisitioning during the civil war, which was partially responsible for a famine causing three to ten million deaths.[3]

Alexander Nikolaevich Yakovlev's critiques of political repression under communist rule focus on the treatment of children, which he numbers in the millions, of alleged political opponents. His accounts stress cases in which children of former imperial officers and peasants were held as hostages and sometimes shot during the civil war. His account of the Second World War highlights cases in which the children of soldiers who had surrendered were the victims of state reprisal. Some children, Yakovlev notes, followed their parents to the Gulags, suffering an especially high mortality rate. According to Yakovlev, in 1954 there were 884,057 "specially resettled" children under the age of sixteen. Others were placed in special orphanages run by the secret police in order to be reeducated, often losing even their names, and were considered socially dangerous as adults.[4]

Other accounts focus on extensive networks of civilian informants, consisting of either volunteers, or those forcibly recruited. These networks were used to collect intelligence for the government and report cases of dissent.[5] Many accounts of political repression in the Soviet Union highlight cases in which internal critics were classified as mentally ill (suffering from disorders such as sluggishly progressing schizophrenia) and incarcerated in mental hospitals.[6] The fact that workers in the Soviet Union were not allowed to organize independent, non-state trade union has also been presented as a case of political repression in the Soviet Union.[7]

Various accounts stressing a relationship between political repression and communist rule focus on the suppression of internal uprisings by military force, such as the Tambov rebellion and the Kronstadt rebellion during the Russian Civil War, and the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 in China.

Ex-communist dissident Milovan Djilas, among others, focused on the relationship between political repression and the rise of a powerful "new class" of party bureaucrats that had emerged under communist rule, and exploited the rest of the population. (see nomenklatura)

Critics claim that communist states provided low standards of living and committed numerous human rights violations, including millions of deaths caused directly or indirectly by the government. Estimates of the number of such deaths, in particular those that occurred in China and the Soviet Union, vary greatly depending on the source and methodology, with numbers ranging from under 30 million to 145 million worldwide. Critics argue that the Soviet Union experienced a severe economic downturn in the 1970s and 1980s, which contributed to its collapse, and that China has been reforming since towards a more market-oriented economy.


Loss of life
Main article: Mass killings under Communist regimes

Scholars such as Stephane Courtois, Steven Rosefielde (in Red Holocaust), Banjamin Valentino[25] and R.J. Rummel have argued that communist regimes were responsible for tens or even hundreds of millions of deaths. These deaths mostly occurred under the rule of Stalin and Mao. Therefore, these particular periods of communist rule in Russia and China receive considerable attention in The Black Book of Communism, though other communist regimes have also caused high number of deaths, not least the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia, which is often acclaimed to have killed more of its citizens than any other in history.[citation needed]

These accounts often divide their death toll estimates into two categories:
1.Executions of people who had received the death penalty for various charges, or deaths that occurred in prison.
2.Deaths that were not caused directly by the regime (the people in question were not executed and did not die in prison), but are considered to have died as an indirect result of state or communist party policies. Courtois, among others, argues that most victims of communist rule fell in this category, which is often the subject of considerable controversy.

In most communist states, the death penalty was a legal form of punishment for most of their existence, with a few exceptions. (The Soviet Union, for example, formally abolished the death penalty between 1947 to 1950, though this did nothing to curb executions and acts of genocide).[26] Critics argue that many of the convicted prisoners executed by authorities under communist rule were not criminals, but political dissidents. Stalin's Great Purge in the late 1930s (from roughly 1936-38) is given as the most prominent example of the hypothesis.[27]

With regard to deaths not caused directly by state or party authorities, The Black Book of Communism points to famine and war as the indirect causes of what they see as deaths for which communist regimes were responsible. The Soviet famine of 1932-34 and the Great Leap Forward, in this sense, are often described as man-made famines. These two events alone killed a majority of the people seen as victims of communist states by estimates such as Courtois'. Courtois also blames Mengistu Haile Mariam's regime in Ethiopia for having exacerbated the 1984-1985 famine by imposing unreasonable political and economic burdens on the population.


Estimates

The authors of the Black Book of Communism, R.J. Rummel, Norman Davies, and others have attempted to give estimates of the total number of deaths for which communist rule of a particular state in a particular period was responsible, or the total for all states under communist rule. The question is complicated by the lack of hard data and by biases inherent in any estimation.

The number of people killed under Joseph Stalin's rule in the Soviet Union by 1939 has been estimated as 3.5-8 million by G. Ponton,[28] 6.6 million by V. V. Tsaplin,[29] and 10-11 million by Alec Nove.[30] The number of people killed under Joseph Stalin's rule by the time of his death in 1953 has been estimated as 13-20 million by Steven Rosefielde,[31] 20 million by The Black Book of Communism, 20 to 25 million by Alexander Yakovlev,[32] 43 million by R. J. Rummel,[33] and 50 million by Norman Davies.[34]

The number of people killed under Mao Zedong's rule in the People's Republic of China has been estimated at 19.5 million by Wang Weizhi,[35] 27 million by John Heidenrich,[36] between 38 and 67 million by Kurt Glaser and Stephan Possony,[37] between 32 and 59 million by Robert L. Walker,[38] 50+ million by Steven Rosefielde,[31] 65 million by The Black Book of Communism, well over 70 million by Mao: The Unknown Story, and 77 million by R.J. Rummel.[39]

The authors of The Black Book of Communism have also estimated that 9.3 million people were killed under communist rule in other states: 2 million in North Korea, 2 million in Cambodia, 1.7 million in Africa, 1.5 million in Afghanistan, 1 million in Vietnam, 1 million in Eastern Europe, and 150,000 in Latin America. R.J. Rummel has estimated that 1.7 million were killed by the government of Vietnam, 1.6 million in North Korea (not counting the 1990s famine), 2 million in Cambodia, and 2.5 million in Poland and Yugoslavia.[40] Valentino estimates that 1 to 2 million were killed in Cambodia, 50,000 to 100,000 in Bulgaria, 80,000 to 100,000 in East Germany, 60,000 to 300,000 in Romania, 400,000 to 1,500,000 in North Korea, and 80,000 to 200,000 in North and South Vietnam.[41]

Between the authors Wiezhi, Heidenrich, Glaser, Possony, Ponton, Tsaplin, and Nove, Stalin's Soviet Russia and Mao's China have an estimated total death rate ranging from 23 million to 109 million.

The Black Book of Communism asserts that roughly 94 million died under all communist regimes while Rummel believes around 144.7 million died under six communist regimes. Benjamin Valentino claims that between 21 and 70 million deaths are attributable to the Communist regimes in the USSR, the People's Republic of China and Democratic Kampuchea alone.[25]

Jasper Becker, author of Hungry Ghosts, claims that if the death tolls from the famines caused by communist regimes in China, the USSR, Cambodia, North Korea, Ethiopia, and Mozambique are added together, the figure could be close to 90 million.[42]

These estimates are the three highest numbers of victims blamed on communism by any notable study. However, the totals that include research by Wiezhi, Heidenrich, Glasser, Possony, Ponton, Tsaplin, and Nove do not include other periods of time beyond Stalin or Mao's rule, thus it may possible, when including other communist states, to reach higher totals.

In a January 25, 2006, resolution condemning the crimes of communist regimes, the Council of Europe cited the 94 million total reached by the authors of the Black Book of Communism.

Explanations have been offered for the discrepancies in the number of estimated victims of communist regimes:
First, all these numbers are estimates derived from incomplete data. Researchers often have to extrapolate and interpret available information in order to arrive at their final numbers.
Second, different researchers work with different definitions of what it means to be killed by a regime. As noted above, the vast majority of victims of communist regimes did not die as a result of direct government orders, but as an indirect result of state policy. There is no agreement on the question of whether communist regimes should be held responsible for their deaths and if so, to what degree. The low estimates may count only executions and labor camp deaths as instances of killings by communist regimes, while the high estimates may be based on the argument that communist regimes were responsible for all deaths resulting from famine or war.
Some of the writers make special distinction for Stalin and Mao, who all agree are responsible for the most extensive pattern of severe crimes against humanity, but include little to no statistics on losses of life after their rule.
Another reason is sources available at the time of writing. More recent researchers have access to many of the official archives of communist regimes in East Europe and Soviet Union. However, in Russia many of archives for the period after Stalin's death are still closed

 

[U201491]

That door must be CLOSED.
Anyone wanting a debate and pushes marxism, should try and debate this man.
Also his website is very informative and coherent.
Maintaining our Constitution and the 2nd and ultimately our country depends on routing
and abruptly stopping the damage of Extreme socialism, marxism and communism.
-----------------------------------------------------

OPENING THE DOOR TO COMMUNISM | Marshall Frank


OPENING THE DOOR TO COMMUNISM

By Marshall Frank on October 23, 2013 in Politics & Government

A few notable quotes:

The goal of socialism is communism.

– Vladimir Lenin

The theory of communism can be summed up in one sentence: Abolish private property.

– Karl Marx

Socialism is the same as communism, only better English

– George Bernard Shaw

For us in Russia, communism is a dead dog while, for many in the west, it is a living lion.

– Alexander Solzhenitsyn

I don't really view communism as a bad thing.

– Whoopi Goldberg

The Republican Party and all it's splinter wings better wake up and see the bigger picture. That goes for Libertarians as well, with whose ideology I most closely relate. While so-called moderate democrats remain mute or mildly in concurrence, the extreme left – namely, socialists – are dominating the party in terms of fomenting division within their opposition as a path to victory, and that victory can be defined clearly as a socialist/Marxist where the state controls your lives, and not the other way around. That's coming folks. Many of the well-intentioned democrats aren't even aware of what they are aiding and abetting.

Once the state, (federal government) takes control of every aspect of our freedoms, there will be no heights for individuals to aspire to. Nobody will be allowed great success because great success breeds rich people, and you all can see where that is going today. In modern times, "rich" has been likened to "evil." And the nation will be ripened for another powerful ideology, waiting in the wings to fulfill its prophecy to conquer: Islam

These are two global ideologies that have clearly expressed their intent to conquer the free world. Never have they inched as close as they are now. For the time being, they are working together because each helps further the other's cause. And we tend to forget, Barack Obama's entire pre-political life – for those who have not thoroughly studied him — was marinated in Islam and communism.

If the government gains full socialistic control, with a leadership sympathetic to Islamism, we can kiss the constitution goodbye, it's only a matter of time. The extreme left wing of the Democratic Party have fallen into this trap, allowing socialism and its piggy-back rider, communism, to gain enormous power within America.

No different than most political parties, democrats want to control government. But they have effectively outsmarted republicans and libertarians with two effective tactics:

1. Establishing unity within. While many democrats, behind the scenes, may not agree with each other or all the policies of the Obama wing of the party, they unite behind their leadership to form a solid coalition.

2. They feed the flames of division within the opposition, namely the republican party with a constant barrage of name-calling and campaign of demonizing anyone who appears to be rising in popularity on the other side. It works.

Democrats don't have to do much: Keep unions in sync, continue the glut of entitlements to firm up voter bases, keep the mainstream media on the leash and spew hatred and venom toward any opposition, no matter how absurd.

Republicans, meanwhile, are constantly in-fighting. The labels do not matter, moderate, extreme, Tea Party, etc., as long as it continues on, the democrats will howl with laughter behind closed doors as the republicans whine about each other on Fox News. Meanwhile, in the 2012 elections, some four million registered republicans stayed home from voting because they were dissatisfied with the available candidates.

Dissatisfied? Really? Look what you ended up with...because you stayed home. The tacit statement you intended to make materialized in the form of Barack Obama, socialism and Islamism.

Many libertarians vote their heart. That's admirable. But they don't vote with their brains. They ignore the end result.

Yours truly is registered as an Independent. Yet, I do hope to see the republicans retake the entire congress and the Oval office in the next elections. If they don't, it's bye bye America as we have known it. The republican party is certainly flawed, but they are the only hope to save us from the proverbial slippery slope.

Republicans: Stop the in-fighting between Tea Party and non-Tea Party. You all must realize the power and influence of shifting ethnic and immigrant priorities and accept the fact they are here and must be embraced, even if we don't agree with everything. Issues like abortion and gay marriage aren't going to matter in the overall scheme of things if Obamnites continue to win, win, win. Start compromising, or lose.

Division is deadly. In 1992, third party candidate, Ross Perot, paved the election of Bill Clinton to the White House. The great majority of Perot's 19 percent of the popular vote would have been in the camp of George Bush I. I admired Perot, but he divided the party and Clinton won. That's wasn't so bad, because Clinton was no Barack Obama. If the republicans remain divided, or spawn a third party, the followers of Obama will continue to control our government.

Step back and take a look at the big picture.

It's not so much who we want to win. It's who must lose.

A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.

— Ariel Durant

 

[BoonDocks36]

GunFixx, SW, Taku, you folks did justice to this thread, right hear on Page 6.

Lots of things to read, and ponder over.

Gunfixx, though I did not know the Russian words for #1 question, I knew the issue, as soon as I saw it in English... the second one was new info, thank you.

SW, amazing stuff, in a few words... I wonder if our Diction8tor Sir Luke,theOne, will return to this thread... or even the forum...

Yes, I will miss him, do you remember your last headache, and miss it

philip

 

[U201491]

Similarities Between Islam and Communism
http://beyondthecusp.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/similarities-between-islam-and-communism/

When many people think of Islam they tend to believe that which they have been told endlessly by politicians, journalists, academics, and other sources of presumed authority that Islam is simply a religion that, like most religions we know, values peace and shares many of our values in the West. Nothing could be further from the truth. If I was pressed to define Islam in terms that many in the West are far more familiar with, I would equate it with Communism with the difference being instead of the superiority of the State, the Laws of the State, and the Party Leaders being the final authority in Communism, Islam replaces the State with Allah, the State Laws with the Koran and the Hadith, and the Party Leaders with the Imams.

Further investigation leads to numerous other similarities. In Communism one is expected to fully surrender themselves to the dictates of the State while Islam demands on surrendering themselves to Allah and the defined laws attributed to Allah by Muhammad. Communism grants to the Party Leaders the power to define the desires and rules of the State while Islam gives the power to issue religious edicts known a Fatwas to the Imams. In addition, the Imams also have the power to choose which verses of the Koran, as many are contradictory, the faithful must follow and also interpret the Hadiths and define the actions attributed to Muhammad which are to be imitated by true followers of Islam.

Communism fully expected that their form of governance was superior and would inevitably spread throughout the world, even if it needed a little help by conquest when any resisted the march of Communism. Communists defined peace as the lack of opposition thus peace could only be attained once everyone had surrendered and fallen under the control of the World-Wide Communist State. Islam believes it is the final and ultimate religion and fully defines what one must obey to lead a perfect life. Islamic leaders and many of their followers believe that not only is Islam the only true path, but that Islam must be spread, even by the sword, until every single person has surrendered to Allah and follows the edicts of the Imams. Islam divides the world into two states, the World of Islam (Dar al-Islam) and the World of War (Dar al-Harb). In Islam peace is defined as the point at which the entire population of the world follows Islam and fully surrenders to Allah and Islam.

Communism often used propaganda and would intentionally misrepresent production in order to guarantee that every quota set was met or exceeded. Misrepresenting and outright falsehoods would be used by Communist countries, especially in negotiations with non-Communist nations and would break treaties whenever it served their purposes. In Islam, all these same attributes are referred to as Taqiyya. In simple English one would define Taqiyya as lying. In a political and more general sense Taqiyya would be considered as propaganda, misrepresentation, or misleading all in an effort to further the aims of Islam, especially in order to gain influence or territories. Further, should one reach a treaty of peace with an Islamic Country, they would refer to the negotiation not to be an actual peace treaty but rather a Hudna. A Hudna is, in truth, a truce negotiated not to exceed ten years and may be broken at any point where the Muslim side feels it then has gained military advantage and will defeat their foe. A Hudna is the only allowance in Islam to be negotiated between Islamic entities and any non-Islamic entities. The only real peace in Islam is the complete and total defeat and surrender of the foes of Islam, thus no such thing as a peace treaty can be negotiated with an Islamic Country.

In Communist States the Party Leaders are considered infallible and their rule is absolute. Party Leaders have the power to arbitrarily change the rules and invent charges in order to arrest and remove any persons who are seen as obstructing the State and imprison them in a work camp for life or execute them should they pose a real threat. In Islam the Imams are considered to speak for Allah as his representatives on Earth and as such are infallible. The Imams have the power to arbitrarily change the rules as they see fit and accuse and convict any person who has become troublesome of working against Allah and thus be incarcerated indefinitely or simply executed.

The actual difference between Communism and Islam is one of emphasis. Communism is a form of governance that makes the State the highest authority and thus makes worship of the state as a substitute for religion. Islam is a religion that has total rules for all aspects of life including the establishment of a theocracy placing the Imams, Islamic religious leaders, as the rulers, courts, and authority responsible for governance as demanded by their religion. To put it in a nutshell, Communism is governance usurping the House of Religion; Islam is religion usurping the Halls of Governance.

--------------------
Neither is remotely compatible with America or its intended form of Government.
We are the Government that politicians forgot all about.
Its time to set them straight.

 

[U201491]

The Marxist March.

:angry:ffwall::angry:


Now 'executive power' czar

Specializes in bypassing Congress to enact 'progressive change'


Now Obama gets executive power czar

 

[stratbastard]

Philosophically (not merely politically) a human has one basic innate right, but has to choose it: the right to think or not to think. One can rationally integrate what he has learned, taking responsibility for acquiring knowledge through a rational process... OR he can avoid that responsibility and be vulnerable to the inevitable consequences by default. There is nothing more unique or innate in his structure, as he is born with the single tool of his mind: volitional choice... he has the right to think, and it is innately (and uniquely) in his nature, but can choose NOT to do so.

All right folks. I'm interested to see what you all believe about the idea of natural rights. Be advised this is a purely philosophical issue, not political and not legal.

Do you believe that humanity has any innate structure? Any kind of natural right? Or do you believe that rights stem from society?

 

[jluck]

I think it's time to jump ship on this thread. Obviously some kid is in college, read some books, thinks he has it all figured out and accepted (fell victim) to the schools progressive teaching. I would not be surprised if this very thread was subject of some school project and ends up part of a thesis.

When Mr. Luke23 hits the work force and starts to have more and more stuff he earns in life stripped away from him he will look back on this time of his life and rethink things.....And then again maybe not, after all there are people like Ed Schultz out there that never seem to see the light.

 

[simon99]

I think it's time to jump ship on this thread. Obviously some kid is in college, read some books, thinks he has it all figured out and accepted (fell victim) to the schools progressive teaching. I would not be surprised if this very thread was subject of some school project and ends up part of a thesis.

When Mr. Luke23 hits the work force and starts to have more and more stuff he earns in life stripped away from him he will look back on this time of his life and rethink things.....And then again maybe not, after all there are people like Ed Schultz out there that never seem to see the light.

A stint in the military during combat would sort out his worldviews quickly....

 

[2506]

Of all the time I spent studying governments and politics in college, the only thing I really remember is how Communism really operates:

You pretend to work, and the government pretends to pay you. It's doomed to fail.