Lawrence O’Donnell Explains His Brand of Socialism: ‘I Hate Bad Socialism’
- Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:34am by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell has outed himself as a socialist in the past. He’s even echoed a Newsweek article and claimed “we are all socialists,” referring to the socialism that has creeped into some aspects of the American economy. But now Larry is clarifying: he’s not just a socialists, he’s now “as much a capitalist as I am a socialist“ and he hates ”bad socialism.”
What inspired this bloviation on socialism? O‘Donnell was moved by Bill Maher’s Friday monologue in which he declared socialism shouldn’t be considered a bad, four-letter word. O’Donnell, then, decided to replay Maher’s thoughts as his “Re-write” segment. But, as Mediaite notes, not before adding some of his own thoughts:
He did not bother to name a single capitalist feature in the Cuban economy, though the tourist-only Havana hotels may, in some skewed way, count. Instead, he gave China as an example of the middle ground: “China has a lot more capitalism than Cuba, but a lot more socialism than the United States.” And, for good measure, gave an example of a type of socialism he hates: agriculture subsidies. “I’m a socialist, but I hate bad socialism,” he noted, “and there is plenty of bad socialism out there.” He concluded he was “as much as a capitalist as I am a socialist,” and that the stigma the word has in American culture was undeserved. Then Maher took it away with his “It Gets Better” segment.
Watch below as Larry and Bill try their darndest to remove any stigma from socialism:
In the end, socialism is socialism.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 702 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 541 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 360 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 357 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 360 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 275 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 149 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 356 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (162)
bruce_baker
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:34amFunny, I’ve seen some charts that claim to show that socialism leads to communisim. They are both founded on the theories and philosophy of Karl Marx. If there’s even a remote possibility of that happening, then we must guard against it at all costs. In the 20th century, communists killed 135 million people, according to the U.S. Congressional Record. Our Savior gave us advice on judging good and evil. “By their fruits shall ye know them”. Strange fruit, all those bodies. How many did evil capitalism kill in the 20th century? Hitler only killed 6 million Jews, and we thought him a monster. Doesn’t that say something about us? He was a mere piker compared to Stalin. Stalin executed or sent at least 30 million people to the gulags to starve to death.
Our founding fathers believed that they were being guided by the hand of God as they drafted our Constitution. Marx admitted the existence of no diety. His theory binds men with the chains of government, to be loosened as those men conform to the ideal of the State, under the control of their all knowing, always benificent masters, uh, that is, comrades. Sounds too much like slavery to me. I’d rather have a government that is bound to guard my God given rights. We can’t have both, in the long run. Which do you want to give up?
The question for 2012 becomes, “Do you want your children to live in a communist country, or not?”
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:42amSomeone tell is effing idiot that given the nature of man any form of government that rewards the lazy with the fruits of the productiove WILL ALWAYS FAIL. Sooner or later the demand from the non-productive out paces the amount being produced.
Report Post »Jaycen
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:52amCommunism, Socialism, Nazism and Marxism are all pretty much the same thing. It’s hilarious to listen to a Liberal try to describe the distinct nuances of the different brands of Marxism.
One leads inevitably to the other. They are so alike, that for any practical purpose it doesn’t matter. More importantly, the distinctions are only intended to mask and confuse. “Oh no, we’re not communists, we’re socialists.”
Uh huh.
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 11:07amwtf is good socialism?????
Report Post »vincere vel mori
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 11:29amMy answer is hell no I dont wish to live in a communist nation!! Those of you that do, just visit Cuba, North Korea or China sometime. Stay there for just one day and you will be begging to come back to America. If you like oppression, subversion, poverty and no chance of ever realizing your true potential then go there. Please go there and leave us the hell alone.
Report Post »Thomas
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 11:53amWhy do people think they don’t have work in Socialist and Communist countries? You have different classes in those countries also the only problem is that what you are born that is where you stay. There is no advancement there and no mingling of the classes. In a Capitalist country you can decide to change jobs and can even start your own business and who knows you might come up with a good idea and become wealthy but not in Communist and Socialist countries. The banevolent Politicians there are treated like Gods while the rest are made slaves to them and have to wait in line to get toilet paper and bread. Those government gods also get to decide what and how much you get while they fill their guts with the finest food and wear the finest clothes. You ever noticed the suits those Communist and Socialist politicians wear and how they fly all over the place eating and dining in the riches places. People better wake up.
Report Post »Shiroi Raion
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 12:22pmGood Socialism is the Socialism that Progressive Liberals imagine in their warped, ignorant minds.
I actually had a professor tell us that true Communism has never existed. He was trying to get the class to believe that America would succeed where every other country has failed. He also taught us that the Founding Fathers were evil rich slavers. He showed us Michael Moore’s movie on Cuban health care being better than ours.
What did I get out of his class? Liberals are allowed to teach theory as though it is fact, but Conservatives aren’t allowed to teach religious theory as theory. They don‘t seem to realize they can’t create a GOOD government by using lies and corruption. In fact, the corruption and dishonesty and insanity they use to get their ways guarantees that their Socialist government would be no different than all the others that failed. They can only create another evil empire.
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 12:23pmFirst of all, one cannot address O’Donnell without noting what a crashing bore he is. The man is a monotoned ventroliquist’s dummy. I‘m waiting for the day we actually see a puppeteer’s hand up his back.
Report Post »Saying that…O’Donnell just gave us his version of the lefty standard..”communism works, it just hasn’t been implemented properly yet”. File it under…”O’Donnell is a dullard”.
Classical Liberal
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 12:45pmBruce, its more complicated than choosing a side for or against socialism. To little protection from either side will lead to tyranny, one possibility being government tyranny, the other being tyranny of industry.
When Grover Cleveland took office towards the end of the 19th century, he was faced with an out of control government, and big business tyranny including companies that decided to pay their workers with tokens to be used as credit that could only be used at company shops. Cleveland looked to the constitution for guidance and began reforming business practices and reeling in big government.
There needs to be a balanced approach when dealing with government. Protecting the workers from tyrannical business practices was very much a socialist action in theory, but he didn’t force the redistribution of wealth. The best way to ensure our values and freedoms are protected is to use a balanced approach. To much of any ideology without regard for others will lead to tyranny.
Report Post »addie
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 3:35pmActually Classical you are wrong, Grover EXPANDED government big time and began regulating businesses. In his second term the economy went into a tailspin, unemployment was at 20%. He had also ignored the gold back requirement spending money without shame (hmmm, sounds like the same democrats we have in office today)
However, take Calvin Coolidge for instance. He was very pro-business, anti regulation and in the roaring 20′s there was the LEAST amount of gap between rich and poor. Everyone was getting rich because there were limited regulations that prevent people from following their dreams. Regulations ONLY work to keep big business bigger and prevent small business from raising up and competing.
Hoover and Coolidge split hairs often when it came to business, Hoover was more pro regulation and socialism and BIG government spending. (If hoover was a president today he would be a democrat) Well the economy tanks with Hoover sending the economy into yet another tailspin and hence the start of the great depression.
Regulation and Big government suffocate innovation and freedom to prosper. Big government and regulations cause big business to grow bigger and the little guy to give up from red tape before they even get started. When has regulations helped a business get started? NEVER but it certainly helps big businesses not get any competition!
Report Post »WHIZ
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 4:00pmHey, BRUCE_BAKER,
The USSR had nuclear weapons! During the cold war it was a matter of national security for not discussing Soviet atrocities against christians in public. So those dead national socialist became the most evil regime in all history. And besides, it only diminishes the holocaust.
Liberals understood this and have capitalized on this opportunity to dis-associate themselves with the soviets while still trying to implement marxist ideals and policies in America. Anne Applebaum explains this well in her introduction to her book, Gulag.
In retrospect, the red diaper babies were extremely successful in propagating their baby boomer counterparts/adversaries! Back then baby boomers didn’t even know what hit them (I’m not from that generation)!
Well, anyway. In my opinion, all socialism really is, is when a nation is so far in debt the international banksters what guaranties by the government that they will get their money back. I think we know all the rest!
Report Post »Bluebonnet
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 4:14pmPoor Larry, backtracking again. He’s a capitalist, but he’s also a socialist, but not a bad socialist????
Report Post »Now, what’s he really saying is: He’s a good socialist who want to earn money like a capitalist. duh?
Let’s try that again, I’m confused by what this crazy man sez.
Classical Liberal
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:07pmAddie, The necessary regulations at the time protected citizens at that time from obscene working conditions and slave labor type business practices. So yes businesses did take a hit, at exactly where they were profiting off virtual slave labor. But that was the point I tried to make, not that he deregulated or over-regulated, but that he sought to do right by the American people who he believed had been victimized by big business during the industrial revolution.
To far to the right or to far to the left, either way, you will probably screw the American people. That is why balanced thinking taking key points from each spectrums ideology is important to successful government which protects and serves its peoples interests. Otherwise you will find yourself in a totalitarian state where one sides views have been oppressed or shut out.
As for the success of coolidge, an economy moves like the tide. I am pretty sure he ended his office in the middle of the great depression. There were many factors that contributed to the economic prosperity of the 1920‘s beyond Coolidge’s leadership and giving all the credit to him would be unwise although the actions of hoover and roosevelt undoubtedly pro-longed the depression.
Report Post »Classical Liberal
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:16pmNever mind about leaving during the recession, just refreshed my history and found I was wrong. It was during Hoover’s administration. whoops.
Report Post »Armed Patriot
Posted on August 3, 2011 at 7:17amSocialism is bad, umkaaay???
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on August 3, 2011 at 11:39amI guess he hates bad CANCER as well.
Report Post »jdw2469
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:24amHave you ever noticed that little white spot on top of chicken$#!t? Well…….that’s chicken$#!t too!!! I wonder if he disagrees with bad communism too? Or, bad Naziism, or bad racism, or bad drug addiction? I can’t take ANYONE serious who has been MOVED my something/anything Bill Maher says!!! Liberals HATE America and all that she stands for, they can’t explain their way out of that!
Report Post »one years food ration like glenn says
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:37amNo larry, Socializm = BAD !!! Capitalizm = GOOD period.. You fool… I can’t believe that comcast lets this fool speak this crap… Whatever, as they say, freedom of speech in a free world.. It just makes me sick to my stomach.. Really , I feel ill when I hear this guy speak.. I choose not to watch or listen…
Report Post »jeckelmyhyde
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:21amI had a flashback to the gay rights debate via the LSM, they just changed a few words.
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:15amAnd the answer to the farm subsidies is, as is to much of taxation and spending, the Fair Tax. “We can’t cut farm subsidies, because that will raise the price of food on store shelves.” So what? That food is already more expensive than the receipt suggests because of the taxation that undergirds the subsidies that went into making it easier (less costly) for the (usually corporate mega-)farmers to grow.
Cut out the middleman. Slash all argo-welfare to zero. Institute the Fair Tax. A vital component of the Fair Tax is monthly stipends from the government to every citizen, barnone, for subsistence basics. That would include food. If the price of food rises, that stipend rises commensurately, since the stipend if indexed to the Consumer Price Index. If the cost of the stipends rises too much, the Fair Tax sales tax rate will have to rise, but it will mean the price tags on all products are finally honest, and no one will starve if it’s expensive to farm in America.
Report Post »ktowers
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:08am@LPHP: Outstanding post. That is the answer.
Report Post »hillbillyinny
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 1:45pmThe only problem with your premise is that it is cost ALL FARMERS much more than Americans are willing to pay for food to produce the food we eat! Subsidies are paid to keep food costs down for the consumer. Even with subsidies, some years (bad years, for corn pre-Ethanol), prices are so low to the farmer that it really doesn’t make sense to farm. If production costs are higher than return, how do you LIVE with no personal return on your product? How do you pay costs, housing, personal food, healthcare (most small and family farmers do not have health care for themselves even is they can access public programs for their children).
I realize that some large family farms and corporate farms are in a world apart of small family farms, dairy farms and specialty farms. The price paid farmers for each 100 weight of milk is based on 10% of the cheese sold in the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. It is price fixing and often is not even close to production costs, even as low as one-half need to just cover farm production and shipping of milk (before pasturization, bottling and shipping to the store).
There are those who are receiving subsidies who due to personal income off the farm should not qualify for these subsidies based on personal worth, but more often, families and individuals are struggling to bring you safe and good food for you and your family, pets and friends. Subsidies should not be needed, and acutally are not wanted by farmers, but removed, food prices will
Report Post »hillbillyinny
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 1:49pm(continued)
necessarily rise!
(Sorry for typos, rushing to get out to move fence for sheep.)
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 6:46pmYes. This is why I say couple them with the Fair Tax. So what if everything becomes 50% of even 100% more expensive overnight. More than that difference will stay in your paycheck.
In a regular industry, when it doesn’t make economic sense to produce anything, producers … stop. Leave your fields fallow for a year. Take your acres out of production and the value to all other farmers increases. They’re called farm “co-ops” for a reason. Let the farmers in production in a given year pay into a fund that pays the farmers out of production that year to insure that their equipment depreciation etc. is not crippling and that they have food on the table all year.
If they’re in a situation where they are still paying the bank for a loan, first and foremost, they’ve gotten themselves in an untenable situation. Reducing income coupled with an increasing outgo means bankruptcy is inevitable. If the loan is on equipment, they can rent that equipment to other farmers to use for the year to keep the note paid.
In short order, a new equilibrium will settle out of the change over to the Fair Tax and the simplified cost structure of farming will see those who can adjust prosper and those who can’t, get out.
Report Post »Pallamus
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:11amI guess the idiot would love oppression, too, eh?
Report Post »Charlie Justice
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 10:05amwell…not BAD oppression
Report Post »turkey13
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 10:46amI’v got a deal for the socilist, let them all go to Cuba or Russia and they can enjoy it to the max.
Report Post »UlyssesP
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:10amHe concluded he was “as much as a lying buffoon carrying water for Obama as I am a socialist,”
Report Post »Lesbian Packing Hollow Points
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:08amEven though Medicare and Medicaid reimburse so far below the Capitalist market mean that doctors are refusing to even consider it, Social(ist In)Security is a Ponzi scheme, robbing the future to pay for, not its original mission of old age pensions, but for younger and younger clientele who get disability and survivor’s benefits in a system that has to be periodicly rescued by the Capitalist economy that is its engine.
And let’s not forget Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two more quasi-corporate/quasi-governmental organizations so corrupt with power that politicians think nothing of treating it as a personal piggy bank and money laundry for their pet projects and friends even as they dictate that it cut more and more bad and worse loans that the Capitalist economy CAN’T support until… oops. They crashed, and took the entire housing market with them.
That’s right. There‘s nothing wrong with Socialism that Capitalism can’t fix.
Socialism. Great idea… until you run out of other people’s money.
Report Post »starman70
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 11:05amYour posts make more sense than the entire Washington establishment from the POTUS and Congress all the way down to the Cubicle Rats pounding away on their word processors, creating more and more inane and assenine regulations.
Americans need to CLEAN HOUSE government wide in 2012.
Report Post »thegodfather
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:07amIn the spirit of “good” socialism, I think Larry should get equal pay with the floor crew people, on his show…you know…as a sign of support for his proletariat brothers.
C’mon Larry… equal pay…..time to support your working class brothers and sisters.
Time to be a “good” socislist.
Report Post »Turin
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:07amactually, that’s communism. ;-)
Report Post »Rickfromillinois
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:05amSounds to me like a socialist whose ratings are not so good and he is worried by losing his job.
Report Post »Gabbie
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:03amIt always amazes me that all these Socialists have not problem collecting their Capitalist paychecks.
Report Post »MidWestMom
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:25amBetcha Larry Boy doesn’t mind getting paid thousands more than the camera operator filming the idiocy that comes out of his mouth. How about spreading some of that socialism around huh? After all, fair is fair Larry. Let’s see you open up that checkbook…
Report Post »Dustyluv
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:28amSo true. If they were good commies they would work for food and shelter….
Report Post »one years food ration like glenn says
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:44am@MIDWESTMOM.. True and good point .. He would make a stink and go right into the bosses office if he EVER found out the camera man was making as much as him.. Trust me on that, and BTW no one ever stops these socialist from paying more to the government in taxes.. Funny that they never do though.. Like Matt demon, lives in a penthouse in Manhattan but complains that the rich don’t pay enough.. hypocrisy at it’s finest..
Report Post »13th Imam
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:51amAnybody have Larry’s address? I would like to stop by and raid his fridge, maybe “borrow” his car, and make use of his spare bedroom. Ain’t Socialism Grand.
Report Post »IceCreamMan
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:54amIf you’re an American “socialist,” most likely you have never lived it and are just an ignorant idealist – or have a mental disorder. Social doesn’t work either way.
Report Post »BIGJAYINPA
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 8:10amCan someone, anyone explain to me WHY do these “people” continue to embrace an economic/social disorder that has FAILED every time it is tried??? I realize that on paper and in theory Socialism looks and sound great, BUT IT DOESN’T WORK WHEN TRIED IN THE REAL WORLD!!! What part of doesn’t work, never worked can’t you idiots understand???….Just askin’
Report Post »sWampy
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:30amOutcome based eduction has been used to brainwash kids into believing socialism might work.
Report Post »awiderview
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:52amI think his point is that so-called Capitalistic countries offer some social benefits- some more, some less. Essentially, if you ride on a public road in the US, you are benefiting from a ‘social’ benefit. (BTW: France, what many would consider a very socialistic country, has privatized much of it’s toll-paying auto routes. So, it can cut both ways.) And indeed, deciding what should be done for the “social good” and what should be private is always a difficult decision- there’s plenty of bad socialism and bad capitalism. Essentially, we all to benefit from being part of an organized society. One would hope that civilized people can find ways to always improve their societies…but it’s certainly not easy.
Report Post »sWampy
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:34amNot through socialism, if everyone shares equally no matter how hard they work, most will work as little as possible. You end up having to force/enslave people to make them work.
Report Post »Stopit
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 9:43pmSOCIALISM – Websters Collegiate 1976
1. any of various economic and politcal theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2. a) a systam of society or group living in which there is no private property b) a system of condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3. a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Larry is lying and trying to put paint the mirage that socialism consists of parts of a capitalistic free society that provide for the weaker elements of the society. Nothing could be further from the truth. Socialism is a vile system resulting from power over free people through the barrel of a gun or progressing toward the total control through barrel of a gun toward the head of a no longer free people.
Awiderview is following his lead. Not so.
Report Post »DIS3
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:50amlARRY, lARRY, lARRY.No one cares what you think.
Report Post »Seabee79
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:49amOOOOOOOOOOOhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I didn’t know there is a good and a bad socialism.
Thanks for clearing that one up stupid O’Donnell.
Report Post »DeannaRae
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:49amIt is not the system that is inherently evil or good. It is what the system pulls from the people involved. Capitalism appeals to the best in men, motivating most to excel, to work, to earn and to take risk. Socialism appeals to the very worst, stripping motivation and incentive. The very existence of the government socialist ghettos proves that socialism is not a helping hand to help someone up, but it is the hand that enables the corrupt to survive.
Report Post »biohazard23
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:46amAmbivalent? Well, yes and no…… Shut up, Larry. Just shut up and go back to playing house with B.lowbermann.
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:45am.
Report Post »Shame his Mama didn’t go to Planned Parenthood……….
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:44amNow he is a capitalist and a socialist? Sorry Mr Odonell it does not work that way you are just now showing yourself to be a true liar and face changing chamelion; you only value what the outlook of the winds are blowing in, and try to jump in that direction.
Report Post »jedi.kep
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:43amIsn‘t that like saying there’s nothing wrong with a littlel lie? Lying is lying and socialism is socialism!
Report Post »Son_of_Liberty
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:43am“socialism shouldn’t be considered a bad, four-letter word.”?!?! you mean like NAZI?
3%
Report Post »countryfirst
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:43amBad socialism ,so there is good solialism?
Report Post »65Mustang
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:42amThe man speaks from both sides of his mouth. Can’t stand to hear him or see him.
Report Post »Taxpayer550
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:41amROFLMAO!
Report Post »I’m sorry, O’Donnell was trying to be funny, right?
WILLIAM E.
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:41amLarry is a socialist who wants it both ways. Obvious he does not study history so I can’t use any of his quacking as facts.
Report Post »NHABE64
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:36amYou are not just a socialist you are also a cockroach as all socialists are indeed cockroaches. WE THE PEOPLE hope to stamp out as many of you pests as we can after 2012 not to worry..
Report Post »MHP
Posted on August 2, 2011 at 7:53amO’Donnell is an idiot. Socialism simply takes every damn nickel and dime thru dollars you got.
Poor people like me have nothing lest we pay it in bills, bankrupting us.
If the socialist democrats get every tax dollar they want, including encinom in this case, I’ll still have nothing, while the demos and politicians and public unions pad their pockets.
I’d rather fight a war to keep what I have and duly have the right to have what I earned
Report Post »