Socialism on the DL

[dark_falcon27]

Normally I hate rumors but this one bares repeating. In casual conversation today a local banker said they got a corporate brief that the Obama administration would like to get the ball rolling on a plan to change our dollar to a standardized currency with mexico and canada. We are already the primary crutch for the Ecuadorian economy since we bought most of it after it's economic crash, and there is also talk of removing healthcare coverage for veterans to open up some cash for other things. And socialized medicine? The demand for medical assistance and wait time in what will be the new "government healthcare centers" will be unreal.

[Southern Boy]

Why dont we remove healthcare for illiegal immagrants and "probably get some duff on this one" medicaid to get some extra cash? I went 20 years without insurance, why? cause I did'nt want to pay for it. Spent years payin medical bills for the family before I got insurance. others have same option. Military has healthcare as a benifit, if it is taken away, okay. Give them the extra money for taking a benifit and they can buy their own insurance, Probably be better than goin to the V.A. If my employer takes a benifit from me, he will replce it with somthing or I hit the road. I can just see re-inlistment drop to near 0.

[Hardballer]

The clock is ticking.

[alhefner]

Talk of the standardized currency, Amero, has been circulating for a few years now.

Obama is all for anything that will dilute our national identity.

As for the health care fiasco, once again the proponents will hold the babies up in front of the cameras whose parents don't have health care. They will spout that it is for the babies that we MUST have national health care. What they will refuse to say is that if that baby develops cancer, it will die because the treatments are not approved.

Look to England and see how many people die each year because the "national health care system" won't approve treatments that would save their lives.

It isn't about health care anyway. It's about making the entire population 100% dependent on the Federal government just to stay alive...then they are allowed to die anyway.

[45nut]

Originally Posted by alhefner

It isn't about health care anyway.

It's all about power and control. Fedzilla has the power and wants to totally control us. Unfortunately for them we are still armed. Although, only a small percentage of armed America even thinks that gun smoke will be in the air before we regain control over our great nation. A much smaller percentage of those will be willing to burn some powder themselves to accomplish our objective.

[alhefner]

Originally Posted by 45nut

It's all about power and control. Fedzilla has the power and wants to totally control us. Unfortunately for them we are still armed. Although, only a small percentage of armed America even thinks that gun smoke will be in the air before we regain control over our great nation. A much smaller percentage of those will be willing to burn some powder themselves to accomplish our objective.

I hope and pray that an armed rebellion will never be required. If it is though, to protect the Constitution and our nation, I'll find a way to be there.

[45nut]

Originally Posted by alhefner

I hope and pray that an armed rebellion will never be required. If it is though, to protect the Constitution and our nation, I'll find a way to be there.

Keep hoping al, but look what change that got us!

[Suicide*Ride]

Originally Posted by Southern Boy

Why dont we remove healthcare for illiegal immagrants and "probably get some duff on this one" medicaid to get some extra cash? I went 20 years without insurance, why? cause I did'nt want to pay for it. Spent years payin medical bills for the family before I got insurance. others have same option. Military has healthcare as a benifit, if it is taken away, okay. Give them the extra money for taking a benifit and they can buy their own insurance, Probably be better than goin to the V.A. If my employer takes a benifit from me, he will replce it with somthing or I hit the road. I can just see re-inlistment drop to near 0.

Sorry, but healthcare for Military is NOT a benifit. Tell me 1 medical insurance company who would cover anyone stationed in Iraq? And as far as enlistment (or re-enlisting) goes..... who in their right mind would ever join w/the possibility of being shot, burned, or loose a limb from an IED/VBIED if their medical costs were to come out of their own pocket?

Don't get me wrong Southern Boy, I'm not picking on you, I just didn't agree with something you said.

SR

[walien]

To the OP, just because someone you know got a brief about it doesn't mean that it's happening. You'd hear a lot more about something that big from US, Canandian and Mexican sources if that was something you had to seriously consider. Unified currencies aren't always bad. There certainly is value in letting a currency float even between countries where you're closely tied. All of that doesn't matter though, you'd be reading about it in the Economist, Globe and Mail, WSJ, whatever newspapers Mexico has, etc.

By the way, if you hate rumors so much, why are you spreading this one?

Also, you're pissed about socialized healthcare being taken away from veterans, but you're pissed that it might be offered to people who aren't.

Make up your mind son.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by walien

To the OP, just because someone you know got a brief about it doesn't mean that it's happening. You'd hear a lot more about something that big from US, Canandian and Mexican sources if that was something you had to seriously consider. Unified currencies aren't always bad. There certainly is value in letting a currency float even between countries where you're closely tied. All of that doesn't matter though, you'd be reading about it in the Economist, Globe and Mail, WSJ, whatever newspapers Mexico has, etc.

By the way, if you hate rumors so much, why are you spreading this one?

Also, you're pissed about socialized healthcare being taken away from veterans, but you're pissed that it might be offered to people who aren't.

Make up your mind son.

You seem to be naive enough to think that the government will be OPEN and HONEST about trying to dump the US dollar in favor of a unified currency. If a unified currency and socialism is so great, move to Europe. We want none of that globalist crap here

You come on here talking about wanting to be a responsible firearms owner and trying to act like a conservative, but yet you praise socialism at every opportunity. Look at all the countries that practice socialism and you will notice that they severely restrict, or outright deny, private ownership of firearms. You can't have socialism and private firearms ownership. You are the one that needs to make up your mind, son. You seem to be another liberal plant that trolls the board trying to teach us the error of our ways and convince us to embrace the new global socialism that Obama and his closet-commie cronies are pushing. If you like socialism and globalism so much, go someplace that has embraced it instead of trying to dismantle my country and everything it stands for.

[walien]

I'm not sure if you know this, but a unified currency and socialism are two different things. The most socialist countries in Europe aren't even a part of the unified currency. Your points about socialism are really misled. Perhaps you might want to read an Economist occasionally.

I should also point out that the US government, as powerful as it is, can not impose a unified currency on Canada and Mexico. I don't think Canada could even do this without the approval of the British figurehead in the country.

It's a rumor that some guy heard from another guy who apparently got a circular at work. It could have been written by some guy who is schizophrenic, doesn't wash, wets himself and lives in his parents basement.

I don't praise socialism at all actually. I just point out the dichotomy of so many people doing as they're told and cursing socialism when they likely are directly receiving the benefits. It's called calling people on their own BS and expecting them to think for themselves. Feel free to search my posts and tell me where I praise socialism.

Again, a multi-country currency is not socialism. I feel sorry for you if you can't get that.

go someplace that has embraced it

The United States HAS embraced it. Ever heard of unemployment benefits, welfare, social security, medicare, medicaid, etc, etc. All socialism. You seem against this. What are you doing to lobby against these programs? Do you think that people on here who benefit from these programs are socialist? I pay into several of them and use none. Pay into them heartily I might add.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by walien

I'm not sure if you know this, but a unified currency and socialism are two different things. The most socialist countries in Europe aren't even a part of the unified currency. Your points about socialism are really misled. Perhaps you might want to read an Economist occasionally.

I should also point out that the US government, as powerful as it is, can not impose a unified currency on Canada and Mexico. I don't think Canada could even do this without the approval of the British figurehead in the country.

It's a rumor that some guy heard from another guy who apparently got a circular at work. It could have been written by some guy who is schizophrenic, doesn't wash, wets himself and lives in his parents basement.

I don't praise socialism at all actually. I just point out the dichotomy of so many people doing as they're told and cursing socialism when they likely are directly receiving the benefits. It's called calling people on their own BS and expecting them to think for themselves. Feel free to search my posts and tell me where I praise socialism.

Again, a multi-country currency is not socialism. I feel sorry for you if you can't get that.



The United States HAS embraced it. Ever heard of unemployment benefits, welfare, social security, medicare, medicaid, etc, etc. All socialism. You seem against this. What are you doing to lobby against these programs? Do you think that people on here who benefit from these programs are socialist? I pay into several of them and use none. Pay into them heartily I might add.

And I feel sorry that you seem incapable of READING a post before you start your psuedointelectual replies. I said unified currency AND socialism because you mentioned both. If the US has embraced socialised medicine, then why don't all of us have a gov't healthcare card in our wallets? I also pay into those programs and am on unemployment right now and am STILL paying into those programs. But the thing is I actually worked to be eligible. Most of the people clamoring for universal healthcare have worked very little in their lives.

But it doesn't matter what I say because in typical liberal fashion you will twist my words and only read what you want to read in an effort to appear highly intellectual so you can astound us "poor misguided" people into embracing the globalism. So I chose to not waste any more time.

[walien]

Most of the people clamoring for universal healthcare have worked very little in their lives.

Really? Based on what data? Low income earners (aka those you are talking about) ALREADY have government provided healthcare.

I also pay into those programs and am on unemployment right now and am STILL paying into those programs.

Yes, you paid into it, but not necessarily what you are getting out of it. It's a government mandated insurance plan. It's a socialist program. Plenty of people will never use it and many couldn't get it even if they got laid off. It's a socialist program. You might want to keep that in mind when you blindly rage against socialism. Should you hate socialism, why did you make the claim?

then why don't all of us have a gov't healthcare card in our wallets?

I answered that already.

But it doesn't matter what I say because in typical liberal fashion you will twist my words and only read what you want to read in an effort to appear highly intellectual so you can astound us "poor misguided" people into embracing the globalism. So I chose to not waste any more time.

It does matter what you say. I'm reading it, understanding your arguments and challenging their foundations. You, on the other hand, are trying to throw out names at me because seemingly you can't back up your position when I'm calling you on it. Quite frankly, I'm not twisting your words at all. I'm actually quoting them in each part of my post here. They're not being taken out of context. I'm not twisting anything, being insulting or rude. I don't think that anyone here is a "poor misguided" person.

In terms of embracing globalism, what does that have to do with socialism. Currently, the globalism you are probably referring to is the same concept that is subject of protests by left wing groups. I don't think that you'd find that Bush, Cheney, McCain, Pal (she wouldn't know what it was), Obama, Clinton, etc, are anti-globalism. The capitalist forces in the world want globalism. I'm not sure why you're bringing it up here even.

So I chose to not waste any more time.

I guess if you can't back up your statements or give any arguments against mine, then you might be wasting your time.

Sorry to hear about the unemployment thing. I've been there before and it's not fun. Keep your head up and things will turn around.

[bcj1755]

Really? Based on what data? Low income earners (aka those you are talking about) ALREADY have government provided healthcare.

Based on the fact that the vast majority of people I see on Medicaid are those who sit around slinging dope, find a willing round heeled women who starts squeezing out kids, and then they all sit around living off of Uncle Sugar's coin. Low income earners recieving help is fine, they genuinely need it. But those are the ones that have to fight to get the tiniest bit of help. the lazy ones that are just too special to work get it handed to them on a plater.

Yes, you paid into it, but not necessarily what you are getting out of it. It's a government mandated insurance plan. It's a socialist program. Plenty of people will never use it and many couldn't get it even if they got laid off. It's a socialist program. You might want to keep that in mind when you blindly rage against socialism. Should you hate socialism, why did you make the claim?

Yes I paid into it, I was FORCED to pay into it. No choice at all. And since I was laid off when the company I was working for shut the plant down, I had a choice, file the claim or live in the street. Besides, I look at it as a way of getting some of my money back and the fact that I am actively looking for another job. But thanks to the liberal socialists, I'm sorry, Democrats, causing the current economic "downturn" I'm not having any luck.

I answered that already.

Apparently we have different standards of "answered."

It does matter what you say. I'm reading it, understanding your arguments and challenging their foundations. You, on the other hand, are trying to throw out names at me because seemingly you can't back up your position when I'm calling you on it. Quite frankly, I'm not twisting your words at all. I'm actually quoting them in each part of my post here. They're not being taken out of context. I'm not twisting anything, being insulting or rude. I don't think that anyone here is a "poor misguided" person.

In terms of embracing globalism, what does that have to do with socialism. Currently, the globalism you are probably referring to is the same concept that is subject of protests by left wing groups. I don't think that you'd find that Bush, Cheney, McCain, Pal (she wouldn't know what it was), Obama, Clinton, etc, are anti-globalism. The capitalist forces in the world want globalism. I'm not sure why you're bringing it up here even.

Mighty funny to me but I see the same people pushing for globalisation that are pushing for socialism in every country. When all nations have the same form of repressive gov't, it makes it easier for the globalists to take over. I find it amusing that you claim Obama and Clinton are anti-globalist. Clinton signed the NAFTA treaty, which looks to me like a step in the direction of globalistion since it allowed US companies to relocate to a foreign country much eaiser than before. Also, don't forget that Clinton signed the Inter-American Arms Reduction Treaty that would allow foreign countries to tell us what kinds of firearms we, as US citizens, may own. Fortunately, the Senate refused to retify it. And Obama. If he is so "anti-globalist" then why was he at the G20 conference talking up "more cooperation" with other countries? Why did I hear all of them speaking of new international laws regulating monetary systems and wanting to regulate the economic systems of individual sovereign nations? Obama has also "expressed interest" in the various UN arms reduction treaties that would allow the UN to tell us, as US citizens, what kinds of firearms we can and cannot own. I guess we also have different standards of what "globalisation" means.

As far as you "challenging the foundations of my arguments," all I see is the same old tired liberla tlaking points being thrown out. I've heard them before from liberals and socialists form Obama on down the line.

I guess if you can't back up your statements or give any arguments against mine, then you might be wasting your time.

See above. Unless you come up with something besides the standard liberal "facts" that are continually spouted by the "fair and impartial" media, then I am in fact wasting my time.

Sorry to hear about the unemployment thing. I've been there before and it's not fun. Keep your head up and things will turn around.

Thank you for your concern. I started looking for another job last year when we first knew for sure that the company was shutting down. Jobs have been hard to find around here since Slick Willy, in his infinite liberal wisdom, decided to sign the NAFTA treaty.

[SaddleSarge]

Here's a sneak peek at the new currency:

[bcj1755]

I used to have a $3 bill with Slick Willy on it, but someone stole it

"In Three Dollar Bill we trust...NOT!"

[kerk]

Originally Posted by alhefner

Talk of the standardized currency, Amero, has been circulating for a few years now.

Obama is all for anything that will dilute our national identity.

As for the health care fiasco, once again the proponents will hold the babies up in front of the cameras whose parents don't have health care. They will spout that it is for the babies that we MUST have national health care. What they will refuse to say is that if that baby develops cancer, it will die because the treatments are not approved.

Look to England and see how many people die each year because the "national health care system" won't approve treatments that would save their lives.

It isn't about health care anyway. It's about making the entire population 100% dependent on the Federal government just to stay alive...then they are allowed to die anyway.

Yes indeed. And Obama is just another puppet of the powers that be for the end goal of a one world government.

Merging us with Mexico and Canada isn't for our economic benefit, it is simply a step in bringing 3 countries under one government.

As far as a 'one world government', it has to be done in steps.

First you consolidate various countries into blocks, i.e. the European Union, then secondly, you consolidate the blocks under one world rule.

Easier to brings a few blocks under control than over one hundred separate countries.

[walien]

That's a pretty massive conspiracy. What's your proof about any of that?