Cannot answer the question...

[4est_4est_Gump]

What is the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist?

I am not a Socialist, I am a Progressive Democrat.

Ask Bernie what a Socialist is...



We know, not a big deal, just a barge on the Mississippi passing by at night with a load of pantsuits.

​

btw, what the hell is a Progressive Democrat and how is that different from being a Socialist? There are never any meaningful follow-up questions. Maybe Trump will ask her today...

 

[Wat_Tyler]

I'ma gonna wait and hijack the barge with a load of cravats.


Suave and debonair, you see.

 

[putzpotus]

 

[putzpotus]

her New Yrs resolution is to ignore Trump

cause she is afraid!

everytime she opens her cunt, he KICKS it in'

1st R that actually PUNCHS back

Cunt is afraid of a NY builder, Chinks, Russians and ISIS are watching teh cunt cringe

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Jack a barge?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

her New Yrs resolution is to ignore Trump

cause she is afraid!

everytime she opens her cunt, he KICKS it in'

1st R that actually PUNCHS back

Cunt is afraid of a NY builder, Chinks, Russians and ISIS are watching teh cunt cringe

There is that...

I'll bet they loved watching our President pull a Clinton, Bill Cosby Clinton...

 

[Wat_Tyler]

There's a war story . . . "Deluded People Gave In"


More and more, history repeats itself.


Of course, the deluded have always given in, so no changes there.


And, if nothing changes, then nothing changes.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

... same as the old boss...

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Yeah,


but they keep getting fooled again anyway.


"It'll be diff'runt this time . . . ."


Yeah . . . usually worse . . . .

 

[RobDownSouth]

What is the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist?

I am not a Socialist, I am a Progressive Democrat.

Ask Bernie what a Socialist is...



We know, not a big deal, just a barge on the Mississippi passing by at night with a load of pantsuits.

​

btw, what the hell is a Progressive Democrat and how is that different from being a Socialist? There are never any meaningful follow-up questions. Maybe Trump will ask her today...

Here ya go, Chief: The Difference Between Progressivism and Socialism

Now why don't you explain to us the difference between Not-Republicans and Republicans?

Oh wait, nevermind, labels are for other people, not you.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Could be far worse...

In other Clinton news, You've got to have friends:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...island_pal_may_be_exposed_and_overturned.html

 

[miles]

To be more specific there really isn't much difference between Bernie and The Beast.

Both are Socialists, but only one has the balls (pun intended) to admit it.

 

[miles]

Could be far worse...

In other Clinton news, You've got to have friends:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...island_pal_may_be_exposed_and_overturned.html

The Clintons and Obama lie with dogs and are infested with fleas.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Fleas with rich friends.




Or is that flees...?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Hillary Clinton, Progressive (Statist)

"Those who publically espouse the statist philosophy do so in age-old and threadbare platitudes. The depth of thought rarely exceeds three basic tenets: 1) capitalism and individual wealth accumulation is evil; 2) only an economy and society dominated and controlled by a powerful central government, controlled by the left, can guarantee fairness of outcome and absence of any moral absolutes and 3) anyone who disagrees with 1 and 2 is dangerous, ignorant and not only greedy but tyrannical and thus must be relegated to the ash heap of society by any means possible.

"Not wanting to understand that these tenets have been in existence since the late 1840’s, the current proponents act as if they have discovered some new and overwhelmingly successful concept. The failure of those nations that chose to go down this road is conveniently ignored or mired in blissful ignorance. Mindlessly defending American Progressivism, regardless of it irrefutable failures, is all that matters."

http://www.americanthinker.com/arti...ath_of_political_discourse.html#ixzz3wSvPuw8k

 

[miles]

They have sought to use the FCC to revoke the broadcast licenses of Rupert Murdoch and other political hate totems, and have long dreamt of using federal regulation to shut down talk radio. They have gone to the Supreme Court to argue that they should be empowered to ban books, films, magazines, and newspapers when they desire to do so for political reasons. They are energetic suppressors of free speech.

A devastating indictment.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Proper speech is more important than free speech...

 

[oggbashan]

Socialists, Socialism are US terms of abuse used by Republicans.

Neither word has the same meaning in Europe, and the terms used in the US have no basis in real policies advocated by Democrats.

Those Americans who use those terms are just shouting their ignorance.

Of course there are other similar terms of abuse for ignorant Democrats to use about Republicans.

If both sides could realise that some of their opponents' ideas and policies have some merit?

Nah! It'll never happen in Washington.

It happens in London, in Berlin, in Paris. Many items of legislation are passed in their Parliaments with cross-party support, perhaps modified from the original proposals, and maybe better as a result. Consensus politics isn't newsworthy so the differences get headlines in the media, and the agreements don't.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

As a Libertarian, I regard the leadership of both parties as Socialism, the Democrats being the give us more wing and the Republicans the we can fix it wing.

I use it as the clear explanation of their continual statist expansionary tendencies.

Here, and in Europe, it is a pendulum swing. In good times the dumb masses (say those two words quickly) gravitate towards give us more and in bad times they rush to fix it. With each swing, the fixes lose their efficacy...

So it is a pejorative aimed at large, centralized and distant government.

 

[allateup]

Socialists, Socialism are US terms of abuse used by Republicans.

Neither word has the same meaning in Europe, and the terms used in the US have no basis in real policies advocated by Democrats.

Those Americans who use those terms are just shouting their ignorance.

Of course there are other similar terms of abuse for ignorant Democrats to use about Republicans.

If both sides could realise that some of their opponents' ideas and policies have some merit?

Nah! It'll never happen in Washington.

It happens in London, in Berlin, in Paris. Many items of legislation are passed in their Parliaments with cross-party support, perhaps modified from the original proposals, and maybe better as a result. Consensus politics isn't newsworthy so the differences get headlines in the media, and the agreements don't.

Numbnut progressive oggy, always wanting to buy the world a Coke and sing in harmony.

Poor fool loves to conveniently forget that the founding of the USA was specifically - republicanly - constituted to get off the limey and European statist train...

...and that Amendment II was purposefully proposed, passed, and ratified to guarantee that it stays off that love boat of king/queen/government idolatry.

As has been posted by these wise fingers so many, many times:

There is only individual liberty and socialism (no matter all its interchangably related flavors).

A socialist is simply one who favors government action over individual liberty a great majority of the time, while a lover of individual liberty favors inalienable right over any power of government the great majority of the time.

 

[oggbashan]

allateup proves my point.

Socialism is a US term of abuse.

It didn't exist at the time of the American Revolution.

Another question: If the US is so good on individual liberty, how come someone can receive a visit from a SWAT team for not mowing their grass?

If I want to let my grass grow, no government or city agency can or will do anything about it.

 

[allateup]

If the US is so good on individual liberty...

"the US" began boarding back onto the socialist train the second the infamous Compromise was agreed to, instead of the enslavement of human beings being put to a dead end in the Convention.

Thus, that statist track laid for the next 227 years has inevitably brought this country to the USSA it is today.

Give the USSA another 100 years and it'll be much, much closer to your beloved dependency on government, oggy numbnuts.

Of course, meanwhile back here in good old America, many grow in number each day who inherently understand that the whole, present facade needs to come crashing down...

 

[oggbashan]

"the US" began boarding back onto the socialist train the second the infamous Compromise was agreed to, instead of the enslavement of human beings being put to a dead end in the Convention.

Thus, that statist track laid for the next 227 years has inevitably brought this country to the USSA it is today.

Give the USSA another 100 years and it'll be much, much closer to your beloved dependency on government, oggy numbnuts.

Of course, meanwhile back here in good old America, many grow in number each day who inherently understand that the whole, present facade needs to come crashing down...

So - if you were to leave and re-enter the US you would have to say that you are a terrorist and intend to work to destroy your country's institutions?

 

[Disgustipated]

As a Libertarian

Oh. You're that again? Dear Lord. You change more political affiliations more than user names.

 

[allateup]

So - if you were to leave and re-enter the US you would have to say that you are a terrorist and intend to work to destroy your country's institutions?

This is why we can never have nice things, oggy the numbnut fluffer boy.