Comments | pendavi: The Failure of American Socialism

pendavi

The Failure of American Socialism - Liberalism is a Psychology

Jan 10, 2007 16:58

As most of you know, I am a committed Counter-Revolutionary. A friend of mine emailed this fascinating article by belt0033 to me the other day ( Read more... )

Comments 7

thebabynancy January 11 2007, 21:54:00 UTC

Liberalism is a (borderling) psychology - I'll give you that much. But Democracy is a religion... given the current crusade.

thebabynancy January 11 2007, 21:54:28 UTC

borderling=borderline... I can't type.

pendavi January 11 2007, 22:37:03 UTC

That's ok.... I can't read without my reading glasses. I just bought a new pair.

Democracy is a religion in the current climate. Ok... and the problem is .... ???

( ... )

(The comment has been removed)

pendavi January 12 2007, 17:29:14 UTC

I think I would say most of the TV news media has a "leftist slant". Where as the Fox News Channel has a "conservative slant". Therefore none of them can truly claim to be "Fair and Balanced". However, given that the FNC exists (to the irritation of the Socialists) one could say that it balances out the leftist slanted news media. As for the newspapers, I would have to estimate that 99% of them are blatantly Socialist.

--

(The comment has been removed)

pendavi January 13 2007, 18:25:38 UTC

There is a difference with these newspapers. The Daily Oklahoman and the Kansas City Star do not have the circulation and the national (and perhaps international) cache' that the "American Editions of Pravda", like The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, and The New York Times. These three newspapers cover the three largest population centers of the United States. Therefore, their Socialist leaning agenda, which they portray as "morally superior", is read by a large number of people. This makes them enormously influential. And dangerous to the security of the United States. As an example of how dangerous they are, I point to the recent case of the NY Times exposing the NSA's monitoring of phone conversations between suspected terrorists overseas and their contacts here in the U.S. and how the NSA was doing it. In doing so, tipping off the terrorists how they can circumnavigate such surveillance. All because of their derisive hatred of President Bush, who they consider "morally inferior" and therefore must be brought down. Why? ( ... )

flamflim January 19 2007, 02:17:38 UTC

You are quite wrong - no half-decent liberal would take this -- whatever you call it, a fanatical rambling perhaps? -- as an ad hominem attack. Why not? It's a nonsensical farce, that's why.

pendavi January 19 2007, 20:05:10 UTC

Fanatical rambling (perhaps)? Ad hominem attack? Nonsensical farce ( ... )