Republicans want the economy to succeed as they always do. Most Republicans (at least the conservatives) beleive that for the economy to succeed Obama must fail becuase Obama's successful policies mean a failed economy.

I understand that Democrats think Obama's policies will bring America prosperity but such policies have been tried the world over and all have resulted in failure. It is not that man who can make these failed policies succeed or rthe number of previous failed attempts. It is a common truth that Socialism fails the people it purports to help every time it is tried.

Of course, the crazy thing is that Obama's domestic policies aren't really any different from US economic policy going back a good 80 years to FDR. It is only a matter of degree.

Americans cling to the fantasy that we're not a liberal nation, but we most certainly are.

BritBailey:

Of course, the crazy thing is that Obama's domestic policies aren't really any different from US economic policy going back a good 80 years to FDR. It is only a matter of degree.

Exactly my point. FDR's policies almost bankrupted our nation he made the depression worse.

<link>

Americans cling to the fantasy that we're not a liberal nation, but we most certainly are.

In a pig's eye!

@ TexasPete...

So my question to you, sir, is what do you consider socialism? Does a government funded police, fire and safety department qualify as socialism to you? How about a goverment funded highway and transportation system? How about the government backed FDIC program that has saved the savings of thousands of people in recent times. How about unemployment benefits and Medicare (which even most republicans acknowledge is a great system), Social Security and government funded disability programs? So if you say that 'socailism does not work' then what, can you please explain, makes these obviously goverment run agencies work?

Pete, how did FDR make the Depression worse?

And what got us out of the Depression?

mgm531:

@ TexasPete...

So my question to you, sir, is what do you consider socialism?

To make it easy for you I will have to break American Government down into 4 independent groups

1. The Federal Government

2. State Governments

3. Local Governments

4. Individuals.

When Speaking of Socialism in America I would define anything that congress spends money on outside of Article 1 Section 8 of the US constitution. this would include Welfare programs, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid.

When speaking of Socialism in the States it would be the practice and spending of things specifically forbidden by the constitution (see 10th Amendment)

For local Governments it is the same but under the states constitution as well as the Federal.

For individuals it is not possible.

The list above should indicate the Federal Government has the least power over you the state more the local even more and the individual has the most power over himself/herself.

Does a government funded police, fire and safety department qualify as socialism to you?

As long as it id done at state or local level it is fine. It becomes harder to justify under the Federal Governent but under Article 1 section 8 there is room for the US marshals and the FBI

How about a goverment funded highway and transportation system?

Article 1 Section 8 gives the Federal government to finance this.

How about the government backed FDIC program that has saved the savings of thousands of people in recent times. How about unemployment benefits and Medicare (which even most republicans acknowledge is a great system), Social Security and government funded disability programs? So if you say that 'socailism does not work' then what, can you please explain, makes these obviously goverment run agencies work?

These governemtn run agencies rarely work (Social Security Medicare Medicaid are all in shambles and cannot begin to keep the promises they make.) they are not authorized under Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution and are SOCIALISM if this is what we should expect from Obama care we don't need it want it and it IS SOCIALISM.

There's no such thing as a common truth. And, about socialism failing every time it is tried: If that's the case, then why are Scandanavian countries (all moderate forms of socialism) reporting the highest levels of happiness amongst its people and why are capitalistic countries, yes, the U.S. included, in the middle of the pack? That's not failure, no matter how many times your Republicans repeat it it won't make it true. It's just rhetoric. Rhetoric. Rhetoric. That's all.

I see the primary problem as the lack of domestic manufacturing, or should I say NAFTA, trade laws and any companies will to pull up stakes and move to where the slaves will labor for pennies and the governments have no environmental laws - or their laws amount to "You may dump your toxic waste anywhere you please for X amount of yen."

Domestic manufacturing is the very foundation of this nations wealth, health and national security. Without the return of those who left after making billions of dollars and dumping millions of American workers, [fat chance on their return] or new domestic companies to compete against them, we are done. Toast. You can throw all the stimulus money around and piss in the wind because without sustained, heavy, and advanced employment we are simply going to sink deeper into the pit. I know it was on the Presidents campaign agenda [odd that a "socialist" would make domestic manufacturing in the private sector one of his primary goals, eh, TP?] and I intend to remind him and my congressional representatives and the news media.

It would be nice if I wasn't alone in this.

Your definition of socialism is defined purely by your own ideaology. It's too bad you can't process information that runs counter to your bedrock beliefs. If you could, I don't think we'd be so divided as a country right now.

So whether or not something is socialism is defined by whether it is allowed in the U.S. Constitution or not? And if something is done in the U.S. that is not allowed under the Constitution then it is automatically socialist? Huh, I never knew that's how socialism was defined. Now I'm even more impressed with the founding fathers that they had the foresight to write a document defined by it's opposition to an ideology that didn't even exist yet. Awesome.

Pete, I still want to know: if FDR's New Deal didn't get us out of the Depression, what did?

This has been a popular rightwing theme for decades, and it is absolute nonsense.

Here's another question: was the Great Depression the first economic depression in American history? (hint: no, it wasn't). What caused those other depressions and the several recessions we endured throughout the 1800's? (hint: it wasn't socialist leftwing policies, since before FDR, we essentially had the libertarian economy you dolts worship with blind abandon)

BritBailey:

Pete, I still want to know: if FDR's New Deal didn't get us out of the Depression, what did?

WWII

This has been a popular rightwing theme for decades, and it is absolute nonsense.

Did you bother reading the link?

Here's another question: was the Great Depression the first economic depression in American history? (hint: no, it wasn't). What caused those other depressions and the several recessions we endured throughout the 1800's?

FDR did not cause the Depression his policies just lengthened it.

(hint: it wasn't socialist leftwing policies, since before FDR, we essentially had the libertarian economy you dolts worship with blind abandon)

Economies will rise and fall it is a natural occurrence in ANY economic system. How stong the economy is and how quickly a nation over come it is determined by how free the market is.

As Ai said before our socialist european allies are socialist their economy has never been as robust as ours and they fall into rtecession more often. The Soviets spent their entire exsistence ina resession and/or a depression.

The farther left you go the worse it gets.

middle path:

So whether or not something is socialism is defined by whether it is allowed in the U.S. Constitution or not? And if something is done in the U.S. that is not allowed under the Constitution then it is automatically socialist? Huh, I never knew that's how socialism was defined. Now I'm even more impressed with the founding fathers that they had the foresight to write a document defined by it's opposition to an ideology that didn't even exist yet. Awesome.

You asked how I defined socialism. I chose an easily understandible ath for you.

SilasPorter:

Your definition of socialism is defined purely by your own ideaology. It's too bad you can't process information that runs counter to your bedrock beliefs. If you could, I don't think we'd be so divided as a country right now.

So you think that people should abandon their ideology and longheld bedrock beleifs to make our nation appear more united?

I would rather remain divided or you adopt my beleifs if appearing united is so important to you.

SilasPorter:

There's no such thing as a common truth. And, about socialism failing every time it is tried: If that's the case, then why are Scandanavian countries (all moderate forms of socialism) reporting the highest levels of happiness amongst its people

I was refering to successful economies not happiness. Our economy has traditionally run at 3 to 4% less unemployment than the best european nations Our economy is traditionally 5% better than Europe and it is because we are not as socialist as they are.

Throw the Former Soviet Union in the mix (just to show the extreme end of socialism) and you will see they were basically in a constant resession for 70 years.

Do you really beleive they can be all that happy with the lack of sunlight much of the year and all that snow? Something smells rotten in Denmark...or is it Coenhagen?

and why are capitalistic countries, yes, the U.S. included, in the middle of the pack?

I never looked at the happiness quotient.....Mental patients are happier than americans too if that has any meaning?

That's not failure, no matter how many times your Republicans repeat it it won't make it true. It's just rhetoric. Rhetoric. Rhetoric. That's all.

The more socialist a country is the mor prone its economy is to failure just look at the progression from the US to Europe to the Failed Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.