Chavez On Private Schools: Teach Socialism or Face Takeover

What in the hell makes you believe that YOU get to deciode what other people want?

That is simply amazing to me. I mean mindblowing fucking amazing.
When did I say we should intervene? What gives you the right to decide what I want? Thank the GODS we have the constitution to protect me from the tyranny of the majority.

And what exact thing did I say that would make a choice for anybody but myself?

You amaze me, the way you deliberately ignore parts of things to pretend that I, or another (R. Paul for instance) has said something that they haven't. It's like arguing with Asshat about Kabbalism.
 
What in the hell makes you believe that YOU get to deciode what other people want?

That is simply amazing to me. I mean mindblowing fucking amazing.

He's not really "deciding", black. He's discussing it, and obviously he'd dissaprove.

If Alabama were going socialist he'd say the same thing.
 
Yep. Since bush voters are too embarrased to defend their hero, this is a back door way to defend bush. By attacking some petty third world president, who has a habit of bashing bush. That's all it is. There are far, far worse countries and presidents in the world, who don't get 5% of the posts and threads that Chavez does.

:cof1:

Hmmph.

Only reason Chavez has so much power is because of presidentialism. Presidentialism almost always leads to ruin. If south America had followed the UK instead of US model and adopted parliamentarism instead of presidentialism, it wouldn't be the case that half of them would constantly be controlled by dictators. A presidents just one step closer to a dictator. DON'T FOLLOW AMERICA, GUYS! IT'S NOT A GOOD IDEA!
 
When did I say we should intervene? What gives you the right to decide what I want? Thank the GODS we have the constitution to protect me from the tyranny of the majority.

And what exact thing did I say that would make a choice for anybody but myself?

You amaze me, the way you deliberately ignore parts of things to pretend that I, or another (R. Paul for instance) has said something that they haven't. It's like arguing with Asshat about Kabbalism.

When did I say you said we should intervene?

My comment was directed to this ...

Watching a Socialist takeover of a nation is nothing to ignore. I'd rather not allow that to become part of our history because we ignored it somewhere else and dismissed it as 'unimportant' and negligible because it was their own choice.
 
When did I say you said we should intervene?

My comment was directed to this ...
I was talking about OUR history and that I would work against any such change. Not theirs. And I have as much right to work within the system to effect the change I want to see as you do. I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation.

Don't attempt to silence me, I have a right to speak out against such systems of government invading my system.
 
Chavez's popularity may well ultimately depend on the success of his "socialist cities". If no one goes to live in them - or people have to be FORCED to live in them - it would be one of the greatest embarrasments in Venezula's history.

He's trying to abolish the term limits, which may make his reign last forever. The polls currently say the public is divided on it. In America, we have term limits so that a charismatic person can't just rule on his personality alone for decades. Even if they're popular and they were good for the nation, if the popularity truly rested in their policies they should be able to find a suitable successor. That's what Chavez is trying to destroy. He rules on personality alone.
 
Bump...

Here is the last thread that Dano started that didn't begin with "Liberal Democrat"...

Just for the edification of those who had the question.
 
I was talking about OUR history and that I would work against any such change. Not theirs. And I have as much right to work within the system to effect the change I want to see as you do. I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation.

Don't attempt to silence me, I have a right to speak out against such systems of government invading my system.


I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation.

Surely there are better uses of your time. This nation is never going to be a socialist nation, whatever that really means. The dictionary definition means centralized government control over manufacturing, production, and distribution. Calm down my man. That ain't going to happen except in the fevered imagination of Lyndon Larouche types.

A better use of your time would be to fight to end bush's war, to restore the constitutional freedoms we've lost, to fight poverty, etc. :cof1:
 
I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation.

...

A better use of your time would be to fight to end bush's war, to restore the constitutional freedoms we've lost, to fight poverty, etc. :cof1:

He is doing that, since the trend towards centralization of power is THE cause of two and the biggest factor in the third.
 
He is doing that, since the trend towards centralization of power is THE cause of two and the biggest factor in the third.

We have the highest poverty rate in the industrialized world, compared to so-called socialist countries like Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Japan, etc.
 
I will fight against making this nation into a socialist nation.

Surely there are better uses of your time. This nation is never going to be a socialist nation, whatever that really means. The dictionary definition means centralized government control over manufacturing, production, and distribution. Calm down my man. That ain't going to happen except in the fevered imagination of Lyndon Larouche types.

A better use of your time would be to fight to end bush's war, to restore the constitutional freedoms we've lost, to fight poverty, etc. :cof1:

I thought Lyndon Larouche was a socialist?
 
Well I can give up arguing with Darla. If she doesn't believe that Capitalism is superior to Communism than I might as well debate my cat on economics.
 
Back
Top