You’ll Never Believe who the Democratic Socialists’ Chosen Presidential Candidate Is!

By 27 Comments 1,734 views

You might have seen a video that’s making the rounds – a 20-something who looks like he just rolled out of bed after a Jaegermeister bender night preaches why we should all embrace that warm and fuzzy bear known as “Democratic Socialism.” Personally, when I was in my 20s the mornings after Jaeger nights were made up of getting a greasy breakfast and a good workout to get through the previous night’s poison & then probably sacking out on the couch & watching Sports Center. Hey, it was the 90s – Sports Center was a lot more watchable back then. I didn’t go on incoherent political rants like this, but given how little politics interested me back then I probably wouldn’t have made any more sense than this twerp.

I was alerted to this by Liberato’s Chris Wright, who writes a beautifully scathing point by point takedown of the video. He begins by observing:

At the outset, it’s worth noting that you can’t easily find out who made this video or why. it’s a hallmark of the hard Left and should tell you something.

and never takes his foot of the gas. If you want a well reasoned, carefully thought out and thoroughly researched piece, read the entire post at Liberato, because that kind of analysis is not happening here!

When I learned of this video I was in the midst of pushing out my five part “Mind of the Leftist” series while preparing for a long weekend of out of town R and R with the family. But this video is too much of a masterpiece of leftist horse hockey, and now it’s time to give it the mockery it deserves! If you’ve read the analysis at Liberato, the prevailing theme is how dishonest the Radical Left has to be to fool the naive into accepting their extremist agendas. So why not use their tactic and butcher the English language to show how this video is clearly meant to promote the one candidate who can make its vision happen. Once the speaker starts getting into the substance of his beliefs I’ll reveal who the new champion of Democratic Socialism is. There’s only one way to go out through this video – Piece by Piece!

Socialism seems like a scary word but a recent poll shows a majority of Millennials don’t even know what it means. So why is presidential candidate and time traveler Doc Brown advocating for something the older generation fears and the younger generation doesn’t know anything about?

So far so good – people who think that fictitious characters from a 30 year old movie are running for president probably aren’t well versed on the issues. Or anything else – do kids today still sniff airplane glue?

Because he’s not he’s using the term democratic socialism which means something else entire. What’s the difference? Explore in this episode of long-form whether you agree with Bernie Sanders political views or not, it’s important for Americans to understand the difference between traditional socialism and democratic socialism. It seems a lot of people are just here in the socialism part of the phrase and immediately prepping their underground bunkers.

Not everybody is prepping bunkers – that just would only be the people whose homes are being shelled by neighboring countries led by Socialist rule and prefer to not have it imposed back onto them! (See: Ukraine)

Let’s first break down what socialism is since its not communists and this is what a lot of people equate it with. Communism is an extreme form of socialism just like fascism and markets are extreme forms of conservatism. I know lots of words but the point is their extreme parts of any political party and socialism is not automatically equal communism.

Actually, Fascism runs right alongside Communism under extreme leftism – look no further than any college campus today if you want to see the best examples of Fascism. And as for markets being an extreme form of conservatism, he forgot to include the word “free” in front of the word “market.” The Radical Left only likes freedom until they’re in power.

But now that we’ve gotten past the speaker’s purring as to why we should not fear Democratic Socialism, let’s get into the substance of what it stands for. And after you hear this it is obvious that there is only one candidate who Democratic Socialists can support, and that candidate is… Ted Cruz!

But it does equal is the idea that people should run the country and not big businesses banks and corporations.

Wow, just like the candidate who promises to fight the many corporations representing the Chamber of Commerce who want to displace American workers with cheap foreign ones, not to mention compromising national security? And let’s not forget the most vile, evil of those corporations who seek to own the country – Viacom, Disney, the New York Times Corp, Comcast, etc. They don’t seem too fond of our chosen one – Yep, that would be Ted!

It also says that the society should be a place where all people work as equals in cooperation for the common good.

Work as equals? You’ll get no better advocate for equal protection under law and equality of opportunity (not outcome) than this sharp-minded prosecutor!

Versions of socialism advocate that free markets and money should not exist that people should be working for the good of the men and women in their community. Now just by Fox News and the Conservative Party might have you believe this is not what democratic socialism is. Democratic socialism is socialism through the ballot box that says changes in the government and society should be through fair elections.

Somehow we jumped from people accurately telling you that Democratic Socialism is taking your  stuff to meaning that it supports free elections – you can get behind Ted on free elections!

Democratic socialism also says the basic foundations of a society should be provided for through the government so that the people of that state can have a happy healthy life.

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness – Uncle Teddy will never get in the way of that!

It is not do away with free markets, private businesses, or your freedom.

Amazing – once again Ted supports this too!

Unsurprisingly it’s already playing a huge part of our country and you may not even realize it Some of the most obvious are things like Medicare and Social Security the people don’t realize the reason we have a military, national parks, prisons in the whole justice system, public transportation, disposal of your toilet waste, garbage collection, firefighters, police officers, even the road you drive on our because of democratic socialism

Like many leftist theories, we’ve had to really lower the bar for what we’re willing to believe. And I haven’t been able to find specifics, but I’m pretty sure that Cruz does not oppose running toilets, firefighters, or even roads. Chalk up another one for the good guys!

and the Republican Party was recently been calling out Bernie Sanders ideas as un-american

Only because they are, and “Doc Brown” is proud of it! LOL

perhaps don’t realize the things they love most right now, Border Protection, is also a democratic socialist program.

Protecting borders from foreign invasion is DS? Wow, this goes deeper than I thought – every civilization since the dawn of time has been Democratic Socialist!

The most impactful of these programs I would argue is that democratic socialism is the reason why every single child in this country has the right to get an education to high school and not here done but let’s look at the flip side really quick. These programs do take my hand because the government would have to pay for them it would have to increase taxes in some way. In countries successfully implementing the programs bernie sanders is advocating for like universal health care and free public college tuition taxes are higher, especially on the upper class, but because of these taxes they don’t have to pay for things like going to the hospital or getting an education they don’t have premiums are student debt they have a more equal distribution of wealth and generally higher standard of living.

If by higher standard of “living”, you mean high unemployment, being in a “health care” system whose levels of compassion allow its patients to die of starvation and dehydration, and pushing a regressive tax onto citizens who don’t attend college – maybe not so much. But better education and dismantling an expensive, inefficient health care law to raise everyone’s standard of living? In Cruz we trust!

So it’s time we get rid of the stigma around socialism and look at the individual policies being proposed do we agree with them if you don’t that’s ok. But at least you know what you’re voting against come election time and not just advocating blindly against the phrase you might not understand

And hopefully any lefties reading this (from both the Democrat and Republican parties!) are no longer advocating blindly against a candidate they don’t understand.


Image appears via The People’s Cube

OK, I was obviously having fun with this – Uncle Teddy is no more a Democratic Socialist than Democratic Socialism is as sweet & cuddly as this kid is chirping. And the transcript isn’t perfect – I used Youtube’s transcript of the talk, but I doubt that fixing the minor grammatical errors would have made the arguments presented any more honest or coherent.

And all kidding aside, it is disturbing that an ideology is so flawed, so viscous and with such a spectacular track record of failure throughout history is still accepted by the true believers today. For all that Europe is supposed to be our ideal, the old continent is a walking corpse. Any culture that can only survive by replacing its population with people who despise the values of their new home country is destined to die. Although not a perfect parallel, Venezuela’s societal collapse is just Europe on a faster time line.

I guess that the one takeaway question here is for anyone who claims that Socialism works. It’s a fairly simple one, but as the video shows will probably not get a straight answer – How do you define “works”?

Follow Brother Bob on Twitter and Facebook

Cross posted from Brother Bob’s Blog

Blogging by the credo of "Making the world a more offensive place, one blog post at a time", Brother Bob started writing posts around the beginning of the Obama presidency over at Brother Bob's Blog. A born-again Existentialist and self-professed libertarian with conservative tendencies, he has ironically chosen to live in the Washington, DC area - deep behind enemy lines. He has always loved history, and spent eight years volunteering as a tour guide on weekends, giving over 200 tours to roughly 2,500 mostly foreign guests. His tours were highlighted by stories generally not found in the history books or most other tours, such as the importance of the Battle if Antietam, the origins or Arlington Cemetery, and dispelling the myths of FDR's New Deal. Although his favorite subject to blog about is Economics, as seen in his Economics for Politicians series, his posts try to address angles that other conservative writers and the mainstream media (naturally!) miss. "There's no point in putting up a post on a subject that someone smarter than me has already written". He believes in the "Happy Warrior" approach, and tries to inject humor in his posts, sometimes successfully. Two such examples are his posts comparing the modern left to the horrible Star Wars prequels, and analyzing the laments of a DC woman in search of a feminist boyfriend. Brother Bob lives with his very patient wife known as Sister Babe, and their fantastic son. Little Bob. Little Bob is also the reason that being a tour guide came to an end, as spending Saturdays raising a son takes priority over giving lectures to foreign visitors on the folly of Keynesian economics. BB is also grateful for the opportunity to take his place among the outstanding writers at Flopping Aces, appreciates every person who takes the time to read his posts, and especially those who join him in the conversation in the comments.

27 Responses to “You’ll Never Believe who the Democratic Socialists’ Chosen Presidential Candidate Is!”

  1. 1


    The corporate right is terrified by Sanders. The GOP has done NOTHING but hurt the middle class for the past 20 years. If right wing types would look objectively, they’d see that Sanders is the only authentic candidate, taking NO corporate money and has middle class in mind more than any of them. Don’t believe the media hype and brush him off as a ‘socialist’ when he wants to stop the tax breaks, subsidies, loopholes and off shore tax havens of the of the mega corporations and have them pay their fair share. 1% of the wealthiest Americans own more then the rest of us COMBINED! The is no FREE stuff, but we’re being taxed to make up the difference while our roads and schools are crumbling. Exxon made record profits last year. Not only did they not pay a dime in taxes, they got $3 BILLION is subsidies from the government-led by the GOP. Stop the hundreds of billions of dollars going to off shore tax havens. You pay less than $100 in your annual taxes for social programs. You pay a few thousand to the feds for the money they have to make up because of corporate loopholes, subsidies and money sent to off shore tax havens. Stop that and things like free College is very possible.

  2. 2

    Nanny G

    In the video the sleepy-headed man-boy slyly makes his case for income equality.
    But he never tells us why ANYONE would bother with 8 years more schooling to become a surgeon or a structural engineer.
    If a burger-flipper makes the same as an ice rink ”lifeguard,” why hang out in a hot kitchen when you can be paid for sitting over a rink?
    With incentive utterly murdered who would work hard to make a living when he/she could earn the exact same by barely working?

    And, I loved the border security joke.
    Did he think everyone missed it?
    Democratic socialism is strong on borders. LOL!
    YES, so they can keep everybody IN.
    The whole issue of foreigners wanting to come in would be solved.
    No one would want to come in.

  3. 3

    Oblamo binLyen

    @Reem: You are an idiot, there is just absolutely no other way to say it. Are you honestly going to say that the GOP is the problem with the Workers Paradise of Kommieforinastan? You know, that state where Socialism is in full bloom as people and companies are running for the borders. I’m not in love with the GOP they and their twin sister the Democrats are in it to feed at the public trough, not giving one hoot as to what happens 30 years down the road.

  4. 4


    In classic stereotypical leftist ignorance, Reem releases another of his patented diaper emissions. A quick google search will show the breakdown of the 2015 federal budget, and point out the insanity, dishonesty and economic illiteracy of the left:

    The Social Security Ponzi scam takes up 24% of the federal budget
    Medicare soaks up 17%
    Medicaid takes 9%
    ACA subsidies are estimated to take up 1%
    (That is 51% of the federal budget just for social programs that are clearly NOT part of the Constitution, but are merely vote buying scams of the political pigs of both parties.)

    Defense spending is only 16% of the budget. (Something that the Constitution specifically states the federal government is required to do)

    Interest on the federal debt is listed as 6%, “other mandatory spending” while undefined, amounts to 11%, and non-defense ‘discretionary’ spending is at 16%.

    So not counting the debt interest payments (which we have precisely because we have to keep borrowing money to pay for the outrageously worthless “safety net” programs that have done NOTHING to decrease the percentage of those under the poverty level despite the >$22 Trillion wasted) socialist-based government handout programs amount to more than 3x the amount spent on defending our nation.

    What the lazy, greedy, envious little socialist thugs never want to face is the economic reality that their Marx-originated progressive tax scam punishes productivity, making it significantly harder for lower and middle class folks to build wealth and rise up the economic ladder. They can’t admit that Obama’s idiotic tax increases have extended the pain and misery of the bad economic times that arose from the real estate bubble bursting (due to the progressive government PC mandate of subprime loans.) They can’t admit that taking out tens of thousands of dollars of college loans to study special snowflake gender/race underwater basketweaving degrees with zero chance of providing a job capable of providing income sufficient to support a family isn’t a particularly well thought out lifeplan. They are so immersed in the thought-control conditioning that attacks any attempt at securing the border as “BADTHOUGHTRACISM!!” that they refuse to acknowledge the increased rate of criminal activity documented in illegal aliens, and cannot see the irony of American workers being fired from places like Disney as they are humiliated by having to train their H1B visa legal immigrant replacements.

    Let’s look at who is actually paying taxes – real data, instead of stupid, lying leftist propaganda designed to upset the economically illiterate.

    The Top 50 Percent of All Taxpayers Paid 97 Percent of All Income Taxes; the Top 5 Percent Paid 57 Percent of All Income Taxes; and the Top 1 Percent Paid 35 Percent of All Income Taxes in 2011

    According to the IRS, in 2015 the breakdown of taxes paid versus percentage of income earned breaks down as follows:

    Top 1% 35% 19%
    Top 2-5% 21% 15%
    Top 5-10% 12% 12%
    Top 10-25% 17% 22%
    Top 25-50% 11% 21%
    BOTTOM 50% 3% 12%

    So who really isn’t paying their “fair share”?

    Top 20% of Earners Pay 84% of Income Tax
    And the bottom 20%? They get paid by Uncle Sam.

    So what exactly is the kind of “fair” tax reform that the marxist piece of filth Sanders is pushing?

    A progressive estate tax on multi-millionaires and billionaires is the fairest way to reduce wealth inequality and to help invest in a Medicare-for-all plan to guarantee health care as a right, not a privilege.

    The estate tax now applies only to the wealthiest 0.2 percent of Americans, but Republicans have proposed to repeal it altogether. The Republican proposal would cost $269 billion over the coming decade and would help just 5,400 families next year. Nearly three-fourths of the benefits would go to those families inheriting estates worth more than $20 million.

    Instead of repealing the estate tax, we must strengthen it by making the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share.

    See how hypocritical this is? What is ‘fair’ about the federal government taking under force of law additional taxation on money that has already been taxed when it was first earned?

    Furthermore – the progressive reductionist argument – that it is perfectly OK to sanction the government to extort money from people who have already been taxed on that income – solely because it ONLY affects 5400 families a year?

    The collectivists can’t look at the current disaster in Venezuela, the chronic shortages in the other collectivist countries around the world, because they think the Chinese Politburo-controlled central planning economy works better than a capitalist system – all while ignoring the massive wealth inequality in Mao-land.

  5. 5


    OK, the chart from the IRS breakdown of income levels versus portion of taxes paid didn’t come out clearly:

    1. Top 1% earners made 19% of all income, yet paid 35% of all income taxes
    2. Top 2-5% made 15% of all income, yet paid 21% of all taxes.
    3. Top 5-10% made 12% of all income, and paid 12% of all taxes.
    4. Top 10-25% made 22% of all income and paid 17% of all taxes.
    5. Top 25-50% made 21% of all income and paid 11% of all taxes.
    6. BOTTOM 50% made 12% of all income but paid 3% of all taxes.

  6. 6


    Why should those making 19% of all income not be paying 35% of all income taxes? Is there a mysterious logic that suggests paying 19% of all income taxes would somehow make more sense? We’re comparing the percentages of two entirely different things.

    The reason those with the highest income pay more is because those in that category have the ability to pay more, while experiencing far less discomfort as a result. The wealthiest might define discomfort as a reduction in their level of luxury.

    The reason those with the lowest income pay the smallest collective share is because paying a similar percentage as the wealthiest would mean they couldn’t provide themselves with basic food, shelter, and clothing. The margin between meeting basic living expenses and failing to do so is far narrower. Many are struggling just to make ends meet already.

  7. 7


    @Reem: #1
    Damn, son, you need to go back to school and try again. Start with Kindergarten.
    “Exxon made record profits last year. Not only did they not pay a dime in taxes, they got $3 BILLION is subsidies from the government-led by the GOP.”
    Let me shout it out:
    Taxes are a cost of doing business, just like raw materials, labor, and transportation. Like any other expense, they get added to the final cost of their product and get passed on to the consumer.
    You buy a gallon of gasoline? You’re paying Exxon’s taxes. You raise their taxes? That gallon’s going to cost you more.
    And yes, Exxon “pays” taxes. They pay billions in property taxes, employment taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes… The “subsidies” that you despise are tax breaks, which actually lower the cost of the Exxon products that you buy.

    I once met a man like you in a truckstop. He said that trucking companies should be forced to pay more in taxes, to pay for road repairs. I shrugged my shoulders and replied, “Go ahead, we won’t pay them, you will. Every time you buy something at WalMart, you’ll pay a few pennies more.”
    He, like you, didn’t understand.
    In 2014, Exxon made $.17 in profit on every gallon of gasoline that they sold. The governments – local, state and federal – took $.62 in taxes. Who’s gouging us, again? According to Hillary, it was Exxon. But then, she’s no economic genius.
    And it’s obvious that you aren’t, either.

  8. 9


    I believe it’s an entirely sound moral principle to establish at the ground floor level, where it applies to the extent that it assures certain basic needs are met. I wouldn’t have homeless people on the streets, or the mentally ill without access to treatment, or malnourished children in rat infested schools—all of which are part of the current situation. I think those things are a collective societal responsibility. I also believe that those who have benefited the most from the system have a proportionally greater obligation to help support it. The pyramid they’re at the top of has a foundation that holds them up.

    It’s all about balance. Such a system can exist that not only allows people to excel, but rewards them abundantly for doing so. I wouldn’t care in the least if we ceased defining abundance in terms of the unlimited. I don’t think I’d care if the world had fewer billionaires but a thousand more millionaires for every one that went missing.

  9. 10



    Reasonable, humane people agree with you, no one wants the homeless out on the streets, etc. What we object to is the waste of precious resources on answers that at best, are ineffective, and at worst, useless.
    I am quite willing to have a portion of my income go to providing a safety net for people who need help, but I object to having most of that portion end up in the pockets of administrators, or being spent on lavish advertising.
    One Liberal couple that I really admire run a shelter near Savannah. They genuinely care about people. They are there 12 hours a day and basically run the place. There are many people like them in the USA, who could do great things if the government and it’s bureaucrats would just get out of the way. The street-level operations like theirs get about 25% of their agency’s budget.
    That is what reasonable people object to.
    As far as paying more in taxes, with a flat tax they would. Just as an example, at 10% a person who makes $20,000 would pay $2000. A person who makes $200,000 would pay $20,000. Sounds fair to me.

  10. 11

    Nathan Blue

    @Greg: This is a complete diversion as predicated by the left.

    I think those things are a collective societal responsibility.

    You’re free to think that, but imposing that on others is…well…evil.

    The balance you speak of was the point of the free democracy you live in: a nation of laws, not sentiment, and not fleeting political propaganda like the drivel you’re perpetrating above.

    I’d say what’s “fair” is a flat tax, but that’s not the law. The current law says the rich pay more than the poor, percentage-wise. You cite this as allowing the “poor” access to basic food and shelter.

    As defined by whom?

    Income inequality: I feel it’s not fair that some make 250,000 year, while some others only make 100,000. That’s not fair, and some would say in this economic environment, 100K a year isn’t enough to buy a house that has the basics for a family. It’s not fair that some get marble countertops, and others don’t…

    Isn’t it? Basic dignity, like SNAP and like?

    Relativism, junior. It goes on an on. If you want what you want, at the cost of others right to disagree with you, that’s fine. Understand that is something good people will oppose, even if you don’t understand how far astray you’ve run.

    You have no idea the consequences to be seen for following a group that only wants power – you’re power.

    It may be too late, but intelligent, thoughtful people are here to stop you.

  11. 12


    The college students from Obama election should clue in the kiddies in college today, the Politicians make all sorts of promises they cannot possibly keep, Sanders is telling them fairy tales.
    Free college for all, he wont tell them you cant all attend Harvard or Yale.
    Looking at a little history of higher education, many a year ago kids stopped short of high school and went to work, in local factories or on the farm, those families that had means sent kids to high school, the rich went on to college. Then high school became free it became much harder to just get a job at the factory with out the diploma. Baby boomer times, the employers could get picky, and at that time skills were taught in high school hey guys remember shop classes, they are pretty much extinct now, kids dont know which end of a hammer to use.
    Now for that labor job you need to go to a technical institute/college.
    Enter free college, in a generation you will need a masters to get a high paying job.(choose the major wisely)
    The moral of the story:
    Make something free makes it worth every penny you pay for it
    (Free, do not look at your property tax bill)

  12. 13


    What you advocate for is basically to kill off the American work ethic. Punish those who become successful. Create and expand a dependency class for votes. This is today’s Democrat party, your party. Not the party of the little guy the working man. I’m sure you don’t see this but there it is laid bare.

    Just notice how Obama has been working to expand food stamps. Just what has he done to move people off them and up the economic ladder? Where is that success story? Instead they get them dependent and keep them there to insure a dependable voter class.

  13. 14


    We have heard how Hillary Nixon Clinton has said that Foreign Leaders are endorsing her for President.

    The reason for this is because, these Foreign Leaders Know that the Nixon Clintons will give them America’s Top Secrets, on which they can make Lots of Money, and that they will show their Appreciation by making sure that some of those Earnings go to the Treasonous Nixon Clinton Foundation, because if they do Not show their Appreciation, then the Clintons will Not Sell them more American Secrets.

    These Top Secrets that the Clintons Sell to Foreign Leaders, makes those Foreign Leaders and the Clintons Rich, and ends up costing America, and the Foreign Leaders stash that Money in Secret Bank Accounts, and these Foreign Leaders ensure that they use Third Parties to give All or Most of the ‘Donations’ from them to the Clinton Foundation.

    There could be some People who are wondering if a New Political Party will be formed in America if Hillary Clinton Usurps the nomination for Presidential Candidate of the Democratic Party.

    These People would not think that Senator Sanders would form or lead the American Social Democrats, because it looks like he is a Democrat before he is an American, even though he Knows that the Clintons gave NAFTA to America, and compelled Banks to made Non Viable Loans, which harmed the Banking System, Employment, and the Economy.

    The Clintons will falsely accuse that the American Social Democrats were Secretly formed and funded by the Republicans to divide the vote of the Democrats.

    The Clintons would Slanderously say things like that, because as Devious Criminals and as Confirmed Traitors, they Cannot understand how someone can be American before they are a Democrat.

    There are Democratic Party Voters who think that it looks Very Convenient that Hillary Clinton and Senator Sanders are the Only Candidates for Presidential Candidate for the Democratic Party.

    These People think that Senator Sanders is a Puppet of Hillary Clinton, and that he is there to make it look Democratic.

    They think that the 74 year old Socialist Senator Sanders is merely putting on a show of being competition to Hillary Clinton in this Rigged process, and that this shows that he is a Puppet of Hillary Clinton, and of the Clintons.

    This is because Senator Sanders Knows that Hillary Clinton is a Traitor, along with being Corrupt, Incompetent, and a Hardened and Compulsive Liar, and they Know that Senator Sanders Proved his Puppetship to the Clintons is greater than his Loyalty to the American People, because he used the Deceptive phrase that he would not run a negative campaign, even though he Knows that Aiding and Abetting a Confirmed Traitor is running a campaign that is Negative towards Americans and America.

    This is why the American Social Democrats would consider forming their own Political Party if Hillary Clinton is nominated as the Presidential Candidate for the Democratic Party.

    I have already said that we should Not be overly critical of Senator Sanders and assume that he has been Secretly Filmed at Jeffrey Epstein Island, or that the Clintons have given him a Clinton Funded Secret Swiss Bank Account, because this may be too big for one Person like Senator Sanders to manage, even if he is not a Clinton stooge who has a Clinton Funded Secret Swiss Bank Account, because we All Know that the Clinton Machine does Bribe and Intimidate People.

    This is why the American Social Democrats Know that they may Need to form their own Political Party for the next Election, and they can see that Senator Sanders is Wrongly accusing others as being Racists, rather than Protecting America from the Clinton Traitors, and Not every incident or matter is racist, and Senator Sanders said that he was Not going to have a Negative Campaign of Slander, yet he is conducting a campaign that is Negative to Americans and America by overlooking the Treasons, Corruptions, and Criminalities of the Clintons.

    The American Social Democrats Know that the First Line of Defense for America is to Vote for Anyone But Clinton, and one of the Recovered Emails shows that the once missing Clinton Emails says that the Saudis Financed Benghazi Attacks at https:[email protected][email protected]471a61b5b2b#.5vaqt7qgb .

    Bill Secret Harem Clinton has visited the Island of Convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, and there are Many Democratic Party Voters who Know that having Bill Secret Harem Clinton and Hillary Clinton back in the White House will Not be good for America, and the Clintons are peddling Lies and Deceptions Again as Usual.

    There are People who are wondering if Clinton saying that she did Not receive or send Material that was marked Classified is merely another Lawyers’ Parse, because State Department Material is Only ever Classified as Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret, and it is Never Classified as Classified, and an Honest Media would First Discover the Truth, and then Demand an Honest Answer, after they Inform Clinton of the Facts of the Classifications of her time as Secretary of State.

    The American Social Democrats might Vote for the Democrats in the Senate, and they might Vote for American Social Democrats for the Presidency and for the House of Representatives.

    The Clintons are the type of People who would Pay the Police to murder African Americans so that they can meet with the families of the Victims to falsely claim to be the champions of the African Americans who mean Nothing to the Clintons at , and the Clintons have Avoided the families of the Benghazi Victims, and the Benghazi Victims also mean Nothing to the Clintons, because the Clintons Lie to them exactly the same as they Lie to African Americans.

    There could be an Independent bid by another Democrat, possibly Joe Biden, and the American Social Democrats might Not create a New Political Party if Anyone But Clinton is the nominee for Presidential Candidate for the Democratic Party.

    The American Social Democrats consider themselves Americans before they are Democratic Party voters, even though the Clinton Corruptocrats are Too Corrupt to understand this.

    We Know that President George Bush the second said that Bill Clinton his brother and he called Hillary Clinton his Sister in Law, and this is because of the Bush and Clinton Dictatorships, and this is why Many Democratic Party Voters want Anyone but Clinton for President.

  14. 15

    Jim S

    @Greg: Your problem is that you see government as the only instrumentality of society. There are others. Religious and secular charities come to mind. I think a case could be made that the charitable aspect of society should be done by charities, rather than the government. The temptation to use charity to buy votes is too great.

  15. 16

    Jim S

    @Petercat: I think the case could be made that a business tax is immoral.. or at least dishonest. The people end up paying it without most of them realizing it. If you believe the Fair Tax people, anywhere from 20 to 50 percent of what we buy is imbedded taxes. Imagine if all the costs that go into tax compliance went back into the economy. Of course, we’d have to find something for the tax consultants and irs agents to do… ;-D

  16. 17


    @Jim S, #15:

    The federal government is the constitutionally established instrument of the will of the people. Two of its fundamental charges with respect to taxation are to provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States.

  17. 18


    I guess you’ve never known what’s it’s like to be played for a sucker, until now.
    Your Constitution quote is WRONG. There is NOTHING about PROVIDING for the general welfare of the country. NOTHING. Only leftist see what isn’t there and try to tell us it is.
    Here’s what is actually says.
    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

  18. 19


    @Mully, #18:

    The bit I quoted isn’t from the Preamble. It’s from Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, commonly known as The Taxing and Spending Clause. The specific provision therein is known as the General Welfare Clause:

    “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”

    That’s what it says, verbatim. It specifically states that Congress has the power to levy taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare of the nation. I believe most would agree that “the general welfare of the nation” is a reference to the welfare of the people who comprise it.

  19. 20


    Didn’t get to finish my previous post before a PC crash.

    The “general welfare” clause is mentioned twice in the U.S. Constitution: first, in the preamble and second, it is found in Article 1, Section 8.

    The preamble reads: “WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

    Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution refers to the “general welfare” thus: “The Congress shall have the Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States. . .”

    The preamble clearly defines the two major functions of government: (1) ensuring justice, personal freedom, and a free society where individuals are protected from domestic lawbreakers and criminals, and; (2) protecting the people of the United States from foreign aggressors.

    When the Founding Fathers said that “WE THE PEOPLE” established the Constitution to “promote the general Welfare,” they did not mean the federal government would have the power to aid education, build roads, and subsidize business. Likewise, Article 1, Section 8 did not give Congress the right to use tax money for whatever social and economic programs Congress might think would be good for the “general welfare.”

    James Madison stated that the “general welfare” clause was not intended to give Congress an open hand “to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare.” If by the “general welfare,” the Founding Fathers had meant any and all social, economic, or educational programs Congress wanted to create, there would have been no reason to list specific powers of Congress such as establishing courts and maintaining the armed forces. Those powers would simply have been included in one all-encompassing phrase, to “promote the general welfare.”

  20. 21


    There’s been a lot of debate about Madison’s interpretation. Alexander Hamilton took a different view:

    “The terms “general Welfare” were doubtless intended to signify more than was expressed or imported in those which Preceded; otherwise numerous exigencies incident to the affairs of a Nation would have been left without a provision. The phrase is as comprehensive as any that could have been used; because it was not fit that the constitutional authority of the Union, to appropriate its revenues shou’d have been restricted within narrower limits than the “General Welfare” and because this necessarily embraces a vast variety of particulars, which are susceptible neither of specification nor of definition.”

    The authors of the document surely did not intend to impose a totally inflexible restriction that would prevent Congress from addressing future developments that might necessitate a broader interpretation of what properly falls under the heading of “the general welfare.” They saw themselves at the beginning of a new age of enlightenment. I’m sure they had more imagination than that.

  21. 22


    So you believe the founders were “enlightened” to create a giant welfare state in future generations. One that would be used to get votes and keep people in a dependent state for one political party or another. Since Madison was the primary author of the constitution I doubt he had that in mind.

  22. 23


    We know that President George Bush the second said that Bill Clinton is his brother, and that Hillary Clinton is his sister in law, and it is said that a picture tells a thousand words at .

    The Clintons have made 150 Million Dollars over the years from their Speaking Fees, which is merely a Euphemism for the Money Laundering of Bribes, and he Knows that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are of the Establishment Family, as is George Bush, and this why he refers to them as family.

    Perhaps they are laughing in that photo, because Hillary Clinton said that Bill Secret Harem Clinton told her that George Bush looks at lot like Bill Clinton’s Friend Jeffrey Epstein at , and we can see this similarity where George Bush is campaigning for a Fellow Member of the Establishment Family at the Clinton Foundation at .

    George Bush and Hillary Clinton also had a good laugh at her comments during the 2008 Presidential Campaign, and was while she already had a Private Email Server in her Mansion at the time she made that comment.

    Clinton Hillary Nixon Clinton said the following regarding President George Bush the second during her 2008 Presidential Campaign: “Our Constitution is being shredded. We know about the secret wiretaps, the secret military tribunals, the secret White House email accounts,” Clinton said. “It’s a stunning record of secrecy and corruption, of cronyism run amok. It is everything our founders were afraid of, everything our Constitution was designed to prevent.”

    Hillary Clinton and George Bush chatted on how she had already been the President during the time of the Residency rather than Presidency of Bill Secret Harem Clinton at the White House.

    Hillary Clinton said that the Presidency of America should Only be Allocated by the Establishment to Elitists Puppets like us with our Bush and Clinton Dictatorships.

    They said that is simply amusing how the Puppet Mainstream Media Know how to Lie for us Elitists, because we are the Puppets of Establishment.

    George Bush had to concede that the Clintons are the Best Liars he has ever seen in American Politics.

    George Bush said that he would keep it Confidential, but he wanted to Know how the Media Lie for the Clintons, and was it because some Journalists have been to Jeffrey Epstein’s Island, where they were Secretly Filmed, and now they are Puppets and they write what they are told to write.

    Hillary Clinton said that she will ask Bill Clinton to ask if Jeffrey Epstein will invite George Bush to his Island at .

    Hillary Clinton Knows that she has to Pretend that she is a Political opponent of George Bush, in order to Deceive those Gullible American Voters for the Election, and George Bush said that he had wanted her and Jeb Bush to be in the Presidential Election, and that has Already Secretly Donated to the Clinton Foundation, and that he will help her to win the Presidency, because of the Bush and the Clinton Dictatorships of America at .

  23. 24


    Another one from Second City Cop:

    After buying a home in Barrington Hills, Chaoshan Lai and his wife couldn’t unload the 15-year-old townhouse that they’d bought for $935,000 in Central Station, a taxpayer-subsidized development in the South Loop where former Mayor Richard M. Daley lived for years.

    Lai couldn’t even find anyone to rent the townhouse on South Prairie Avenue — until he got a call in 2013 about a woman who’d gotten a “housing choice voucher,” from the Chicago Housing Authority through a program that had long been called Section 8.

    Lai says the woman wanted to lease his three-bedroom, three-and-a-half bath home, which has a library and is within walking distance of Soldier Field and the lakefront.

    “I said, ‘You probably cannot afford the rent,’ ” Lai recalls. “But they said they have a special program in the ‘opportunity area’ that pays much better. I said, ‘Let’s give it a shot.’ ”

    It ended up being a good deal for Lai. Since June 1, 2013, he’s collected more than $100,000 from the CHA, which administers public housing in Chicago for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The CHA pays him $3,911 a month in federal funds to lease his townhouse to the woman and three others in her household, including a child under the age of 6, records show.

    The government is paying $3,911 a month to rent a townhouse for a woman with three kids.
    I have no words…

  24. 25



    If right wing types would look objectively, they’d see that Sanders is the only authentic candidate, taking NO corporate money and has middle class in mind more than any of them.

    Uh… no. Wrong. TRUMP has taken no corporate money; he spends HIS OWN money (something Bernie has NEVER had to do) and has the real needs of the middle class at heart far more than Bernie, because Bernie strives to bring the entire economic system crashing down around them.

    @Nanny G: Actually, socialism IS good border security. In the US, the only thing that has slowed down illegal immigration has been Obama’s wrecking of the economy. Do you see people trying to sneak into Venezuela? Or Cuba?

    @Greg: Nobody’s saying that’s wrong except for you leftists. What is being pointed out is that you are squeezing about all you can from that turnip and looking of an easy fix to your historical economic ignorance by just taking more is going to lead to disaster.


    Just notice how Obama has been working to expand food stamps. Just what has he done to move people off them and up the economic ladder? Where is that success story? Instead they get them dependent and keep them there to insure a dependable voter class.

    The left all but admits they have no idea how to allow the economy to grow robust and strong. For his entire first term, Obama blamed Bush for how terrible the economy was, constantly laying the groundwork for his own failure. Now, in light of the realization of that failure, how does the left address the struggling masses that cannot find any jobs but for low-paying service jobs, which is all that remains? Why they insist low-skilled jobs have their wages artificially jacked up so a family can live off them!

    Those who support the insanity of socialism (be it Obama socialism, Hillary socialism or Bernie socialism) always assume that they can impose their incentive-killing agendas and all things will remains the same; businesses will continue to produce, revenue will continue to be generated and people will happily hand over 50 – 90% if their earnings… and just keep on earning.

    They also conveniently forget that those “successful” socialist countries don’t have the burden of not only defending themselves, but also defending anyone and anything they need to remain in operation. Sweden doesn’t worry about fighting off Russia; the United States (sometimes aka “NATO”) will take care of that. So, if the US becomes one of the socialist community (those who don’t contribute to their own protection but, instead, trade with and build nuclear power plants for peace-threatening regimes), who is left to protect the world or, for that matter, feed and clothe everyone after every natural disaster?

    This is what Russia and China are waiting for and socialists are simply too stupid to realize it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *