FlaviusAetius

Not unlike Maxine Waters' famous slip of the tongue threatening the oil companies with nationalization, which tipped us off that many Democrats really are socialists at heart.
(The Honorable Maxine Waters should probably be considered that version of a socialist [a liberal?] where the only difference between a socialist and a communist is whether it is politically expedient for the politician to declare him/herself to be a communist. Most modern Euro-socialists no longer call for nationalizing the commanding heights of the economy.)

Now that Bernie - a declared "social democrat" (which aligns him with the European socialist parties) - has registered as a Democrat (to get into the NH primary) and has enormous support amongst Democrats, we should conclude that a significant portion of Democrats are socialists of the European model.

Giantaxe

Well it makes a change from claiming he's a National Socialist I suppose.

Not sure what point you are trying to make. I'm sure Waters stands behind her comments and, anyway, where's that $5 gas the Shell executive was "threatening" ??

And I've always felt that people who want to argue "labels" are those that can't posit an actual argument about policies... always easier to scream "liberal", "socialist", "communist", "national socialist" etc. than make a rational argument.

FlaviusAetius

The point we're making is the same, i.e. that these unguarded moments - McCarthy's and Waters' can point to the truth.

As for labels, they are important identifiers of who people are, which philosophy they identify with. Is he a Christian? Is he an atheist? Is he an Islamist? A neo-Con? A liberal? A progressive? A right-wing extremist? (all Republicans qualifiy - by progressive definition). Progressives label everyone anyway.

Giantaxe

Odd, because you're the only one that has raised McCarthy and Waters. So it's the "point" _you're_ making.

I don't care what "progressives" do. The point is that labels are frequently used to avoid rational argument of policies, much like your posts on here often do.

RoadWarriorFromLP

You don't seem to realize that labeling someone as a leftist, statist, socialist, communist, fascist authoritarian anti-American progressive liberal is all that is necessary to prove ones point and win the argument.

zargof

Also, don't bother providing any evidence to support your point as it can easily be dismissed as another example of the liberal bias of the lamestream media.

sir_eccles

The usual m.o. from the GOP is that truth doesn't matter, just keep repeating your talking point louder.

Giantaxe

Another Republican candidate embellishing their "story"?

Rafael Cruz, Ted Cruz Cuban revolution stories disputed.

"Those stories, retold by Mr. Cruz and by his father, Rafael, have hooked Republican audiences and given emotional power to the message that the Texas senator is pushing as an increasingly serious contender for the party’s presidential nomination. In their telling, the father’s experience in Cuba — when the country was swept up by the charismatic, young Fidel Castro, only to see him become a repressive Communist dictator — becomes a parable for the son’s nightmarish vision of government overreach under President Obama."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/10/us...=top-news&_r=0

Giantaxe

#bencarsonwikipedia

I think my favourite is the Coleseum meme:

'Ben Carson Wikipedia' Hashtag Mocks Republican With Offbeat Pyramid Theories And Beyond

username.exe

Any predictions for the debate tomorrow?

Kicks off at 9pm ET and fortunately will be broadcast for free online at foxbusiness.com via Fox Business News.

Fewer candidates in the main debate this time (8), with Christie and Huckabee demoted to the kids table at 7 ET.

Anian

Now I'm hoping that Carson wins the nomination so that he can crash and burn in the election, otherwise the GOP nomination will probably go to Cruz, who is a much more realistic prospect.

Giantaxe

That's why I am wondering whether all these Carson stories are actually sourced from within the Republican party.

sir_eccles

Leaks are never accidental.

FlaviusAetius

Anian, of the two - Rubio and Cruz - who do you think is the more credible prospect? I've sort of narrowed it down to them, but can't decide yet and hope the debate will help.

Interesting that the Republican field's best prospects, IMHO, both happen to be Hispanics.

sir_eccles

It's an interesting observation. Would the GOP base really back a Hispanic nominee in the primary? If they did, would a wider Hispanic electorate which leans Democrat get behind a Hispanic GOP candidate? I am skeptical.

Both Rubio and Cruz have serious flaws in my opinion, both personal character and policy. Which is the least odious?

This interesting story apparently has Sanders (and O'Malley) winning in a landslide against Bush (and Rubio). http://firebrandleft.com/university-...ext-president/