I agree with Tasine’s post that communism has infiltrated America by stealth. And not to take away from that, I wrote the following before I saw Tasine’s post, but I’d still like to post it. I think this adds to the discussion by showing what the attitude is that enabled such communistic sentiment by Americans.

So I’d like to post my response to PeterS’ question:



(BTW- “Busybodies” in the above are in parallel with self-made politicians, from either end of the spectrum, in the secular world of today).

The problem with liberals, in general from what I’ve seen, is that they equate a nanny-state with “Christ-like” helping out the poor when in fact what “benefactors” actually administer under such false pretenses are programs that perpetuate the servitude of the underclasses; which is something that Jesus clearly loathed and both spoke and acted against! What makes liberals truly idiotic and un-American is that they believe that tyrannical overlords, hunh-hum, excuse me, “governments,” are the solution to America’s “problems” of personal liberty, accountability and responsibility. In other words, they want to reverse the original “American Dream;” they want to sell out our personal liberty so that government can “benefactor” us (ie “enslave” us). That is the liberal blindness: they don’t even see they are doing this; and thus the question, “When did we start hating America?”

Democrats showed their hate for America when they created the Ku-Klux-Clan. You continue to hate America as evidenced by the fact that you make the likes of Bernie Sanders one of your front-runners in the presidential race! You continue to hate America because you continue to believe that government and/or its overlords (and it or their handouts) is the solution and by accepting the lie that benefactor-politicians are anything but overlords! In other words, you just don’t “get” America! (I daresay in the same way that most “Christians” don’t “get” Christianity!)

On the other hand, there are conservatives that do the same thing. If you transpose “big business” with “governments” in the above, one should be able to tell what I mean. Perhaps that could be the key to mending the rift between “We the People” in this equation: that we should start calling things what they are instead of hiding behind the deceptiveness and lies of political correctness; which just seems more and more to be a an Orwellian new-speak tool by the overlords to help keep us all in the dark!

Of course, that’s just my opinion based on personal observations and I reserve the right to revise my opinion in the face of reasonable correction.

P.S. How can anyone who states officially and unequivocally that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…” ever, ever be construed to be racist! In fact, those words can only lead to eradicating racism! But, in making such a false accusation as Mr. Sanders has done, what else would you expect an overlording benefactor to proclaim if he was seeking to be your overlording benefactor?

Thanks to you, too, Tasine,

That’s an interesting way of viewing things. Mine is similar, after a fashion I think, and hopefully only a difference in semantics. Being as I consider myself a Christian first and above all, I would call “our case” the common plight of fellow mankind.

I agree with you that on a higher moral level borders are artificial; they are certainly not the line in the sand where my compassion for others stops.

On the other hand, I like to use the analogy of my home with our country. Certainly I’m given to hospitality, but that doesn’t mean I want freeloaders breaking in the back door whenever they please and against my wishes…so with America and its borders. Same with dealing with the poor or anything; I’m willing to give in my own way and amount; but taking from me against my wishes is thievery, whether from the government or my next door neighbor or my closest Christian brother. Liberals and collectivists should stop and think about that...unfortunately, it seems, not many seem all that interested in thinking about things like that. Funny how it seems to me that everything liberals accuse conservatives of are what liberals do as their modus operandi! Is that one of the Alinsky rules for radicals...whatever you get caught doing or are otherwise guilty of, blame the same thing on your opponents? It seems like it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Yep, we think alike and agree on most things - except that you obviously a practicing Christian, and I don't meet the criteria for being a Christian and it is my fault. I fully support you guys who are TRUE Christians and I fully believe the principles of Christianity have been the glue that held America together for a couple of centuries. And, Communism, from all I have read, want Christianity out of sight, and it seems to be working here in the U.S. They're working overtime here in America now, huh? You have more than recognized Christians in your corner, never forget that. :D :D :D :D

Insurgent radical Bernie Sanders' passionate anti-American campaign is eating away at the once-commanding lead of frontrunner Hillary Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary race, according to new polling.

Although Hillary is still edging out Bernie at the national level, according to a new Monmouth University poll for the first time Bernie is now leading Hillary by 7 points in New Hampshire, the first state to vote in 2016. New Hampshire allows unaffiliated voters to participate in the primary of their choice.

Clinton still clings to a small lead among Democrats in the state. She has 43 percent support among Democrats, compared to Sanders' 39 percent support. Sanders enjoys 49 percent support from registered Independents and new voters, way ahead of Clinton's 26 percent.

Vice President Joe Biden, who is pondering joining the race, has 13 percent. A mere 2 percent back Martin O'Malley and Lincoln Chafee, Larry Lessig, and Jim Webb each receive 1 percent.

Karen Tumulty of the Washington Post reports with apparent alarm that Hillary "is suffering a rapid erosion of support among Democratic women — the voters long presumed to be the bedrock in her bid to become the nation’s first female president."

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll indicates that while in July 71 percent of Democratic-leaning female voters expressed support for Clinton, only 42 percent do at the moment, a dramatic 29 percentage point collapse in eight weeks. Tumulty blames Hillary's slide on continuing adverse media coverage of the disappearing emails scandal and a focus on the Clintons' perfidious behavior in the 1990s in the White House.

That Sanders is beating Clinton in New Hampshire and nipping at her heels nearly everywhere else is seeming proof that his hate-filled blame-America-first rhetoric is turning on the radical left-wingers who make up the Democratic Party's political base. Sanders has been getting away for years with describing himself as a "socialist," sometimes a "democratic socialist," when in reality he is an outright America-loathing communist. Clinton, of course, isn't much better with her communitarian-sounding "it takes a village" rhetoric and her close ties to the late radical organizing guru Saul Alinsky.

Sanders' belief in communism is reflected in his platform, which the actual Communist Party USA is openly praising. Even a brief glance reveals his plan to be hopelessly utopian. It will extinguish freedom and shutter businesses and cause widespread suffering especially among the poor people he claims to want to help. It is a program for exporting the best and the brightest to places that appreciate them.

But from a conservative's perspective at least, most of Clinton's policy platform doesn't seem much different from Sanders'. Both want to cripple the United States internally and externally. Both want to go after the so-called 1 percent and tax them aggressively. Both are pandering to the ugly, racist Black Lives Matter movement.

On Monday Bernie said the U.S. was founded on “racist principles” and that police shootings of unarmed black men constitute proof the country hasn't evolved from the days of slavery. “We have got to stand up and say, in America you’re not going to do that. Racism is unacceptable."

The Democratic Party establishment, uncomfortable at the prospect of a Sanders presidency, is now attacking the rising Independent from Vermont.

The Washington Post editorial board weighed in with a fatuous, nitpicking editorial titled "Bernie Sanders isn’t as progressive as you think." It's the kind of treatment a Republican candidate, especially a conservative, gets from the Post.

The newspaper acknowledged that Sanders "delivered a forceful message in a speech at Liberty University on Monday: Inequality is too high, the wealth gap is immoral and rich people have rigged the economy."

Sanders' message, the newspaper asserts, seems to resonate with voters who are anxious about the nation's economic prospects even though it is "hyperbolic." Hyperbolic isn't exactly an adjective the newspaper routinely uses whenever Polarizer-in-Chief Obama exaggerates the so-called wealth gap and how much racism there is in the country.

"Beyond the hyperbole, however, must be real policy," continues the yawn-worthy journalistic pontification. You get the picture.

Although Hillary's campaign apparatchiks have been saying for a while that they won't attack Sanders, she is letting a pro-Clinton super PAC headed by one of her lapdogs do her dirty work.

Correct the Record has been sending emails trying to hit Sanders from the right by tying him to controversial remarks by Jeremy Corbyn, the radical new leader of Britain's Labour Party. Corbyn lauded Hugo Chavez, the dead Marxist dictator of Venezuela who gave Vermonters low-cost fuel oil as part of a program backed by Sanders. He also has said that Chavez's "electoral democratic credentials are beyond reproach."

Correct the Record tried to get the Huffington Post to associate Sanders with Corbyn's assertion that the assassination of Osama bin Laden was "a tragedy." Corbyn also said he would invite his "friends" from Hezbollah to visit the United Kingdom to talk about Middle East peace. Correct the Record flagged an opinion piece Corbyn wrote that claimed NATO's "attempt to encircle Russia is one of the big threats of our time."

Sanders mouthpiece Michael Briggs accuses Correct the Record of "distorting the record." Briggs said:

it is disappointing that Secretary Clinton's super PAC is spreading disinformation about Bernie. This is exactly the kind of politics that Bernie is trying to change. To equate bringing home heating oil to low-income Vermonters with support for the Chavez government is dishonest.

It is no secret that Corbyn and Sanders are ideological soulmates. Corbyn said he is tracking Sanders' campaign "with great interest." When Corbyn won his new post Sanders he was "delighted" at that result. The Correct the Record email also points out that both men have tried to scuttle the nuclear weapons programs of their respective nations.

Correct the Record is controlled by longtime Clinton supplicant David Brock who also heads the George Soros-funded propaganda machine, Media Matters for America. The mentally unstable Brock, a left-wing character assassin who has complained that right-wing "snipers" are trying to kill him, has been whining a great deal lately about the media's coverage of Hillary's campaign and the fact that media outlets are daring to actually report on the multiple scandals that have sprung from her time as secretary of state.

Right now Clinton and Sanders are tripping over each other in an effort to pander to the most hardcore progressives.

Given the intensity of the Democratic establishment's attacks on Sanders so far and the growing anti-incumbent feelings of voters, it is far from clear who will ultimately capture the Democratic nomination.

Matthew Vadum

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Yep, we think alike and agree on most things - except that you obviously are a practicing Christian, and I don't meet the criteria for being a Christian and it is my fault. I fully support you guys who are TRUE Christians and I fully believe the principles of Christianity have been the glue that held America together for a couple of centuries. And, Communism, from all I have read, want Christianity out of sight, and it seems to be working here in the U.S. They're working overtime here in America now, huh? You have more than recognized Christians in your corner, never forget that. :D :D :D :D

:thumbup: :D Thanks again, Tasine!

Christianity, like America, gets a bad rap mostly by the pretenders who are so in name only, but not indeed! There's RINO's and DINO's, but CINO's have been on this earth a lot longer! And secondly by those who really do understand it (in both cases) but want nothing to do with it other than tear it down and make it conform to their corrupt, narcissistic world-view. One thing I'm pretty sure of, is that you know exactly what I mean. :wink:

If you can think of God as love (as the Bible defines him) and Jesus as the human representative of God's love that was able to physically "lay down his life for his friends" with God inside of him and working through him, then you wouldn't be too far off of true Christianity. The word Christ means the Anointed One...in other words, something that was given to someone. It means, explicitly, that he did not take his honor or authority upon himself, rather it explicitly means honor and authority was given to him. None of us meet the criteria for being true Christians other than the Anointed One himself...the rest of us just want to learn from him. Wouldn't it be something if our secular leaders weren't people who "anointed" themselves as worthy but just went about serving people until others who recognized their character encouraged and practically begged them into leadership? I don't mean to preach to you, just wanted to throw out a tidbit or two so you know I'm not your typical "Christian" of today. At least, God I hope not!!!

Looking forward to more chats with you Tasine! Just that I don't always have time...

I agree with Tasine’s post that communism has infiltrated America by stealth. And not to take away from that, I wrote the following before I saw Tasine’s post, but I’d still like to post it. I think this adds to the discussion by showing what the attitude is that enabled such communistic sentiment by Americans.

So I’d like to post my response to PeterS’ question:



(BTW- “Busybodies” in the above are in parallel with self-made politicians, from either end of the spectrum, in the secular world of today).

The problem with liberals, in general from what I’ve seen, is that they equate a nanny-state with “Christ-like” helping out the poor when in fact what “benefactors” actually administer under such false pretenses are programs that perpetuate the servitude of the underclasses; which is something that Jesus clearly loathed and both spoke and acted against! What makes liberals truly idiotic and un-American is that they believe that tyrannical overlords, hunh-hum, excuse me, “governments,” are the solution to America’s “problems” of personal liberty, accountability and responsibility. In other words, they want to reverse the original “American Dream;” they want to sell out our personal liberty so that government can “benefactor” us (ie “enslave” us). That is the liberal blindness: they don’t even see they are doing this; and thus the question, “When did we start hating America?”

Democrats showed their hate for America when they created the Ku-Klux-Clan. You continue to hate America as evidenced by the fact that you make the likes of Bernie Sanders one of your front-runners in the presidential race! You continue to hate America because you continue to believe that government and/or its overlords (and it or their handouts) is the solution and by accepting the lie that benefactor-politicians are anything but overlords! In other words, you just don’t “get” America! (I daresay in the same way that most “Christians” don’t “get” Christianity!)

On the other hand, there are conservatives that do the same thing. If you transpose “big business” with “governments” in the above, one should be able to tell what I mean. Perhaps that could be the key to mending the rift between “We the People” in this equation: that we should start calling things what they are instead of hiding behind the deceptiveness and lies of political correctness; which just seems more and more to be a an Orwellian new-speak tool by the overlords to help keep us all in the dark!

Of course, that’s just my opinion based on personal observations and I reserve the right to revise my opinion in the face of reasonable correction.

P.S. How can anyone who states officially and unequivocally that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…” ever, ever be construed to be racist! In fact, those words can only lead to eradicating racism! But, in making such a false accusation as Mr. Sanders has done, what else would you expect an overlording benefactor to proclaim if he was seeking to be your overlording benefactor?

Pretty accurate, & to the point......{ however}.....a slight correction: The Ku Klux Klan, was started at the end of the Civil war, by "confederate" soldiers, & regular citizens, of the South, because there was little or no law, "post civil war".....in the Southern states! Carpet baggers, {people withno skin in the game}.....came from the North, & tried to "claim" property, etc. from the remnants of the "Southerners".......


KKK, was the only form of "law"...{Vigilanties, etc.}........This allowed "man" to vent his angst, against the North, & allowed racial prejudice, towards the Negroe's, that were suddenly given "freedom", & allowed to own land....{among other things }.........

Yes, our "fore fathers, used slaves { in every way}......had "hemp plantations"........Both Conservative, & Liberal politicians, were human, & "all" suffered the frailities of Humans that even today, have not changed.....{ much }!

The most evident thing that has changed, is the loss of respect for God, by "many men".......Liberals, have been most vocal in the revelation of their lack of morality....seem to "revel in it"........

Spare the lives of "Convicted murderers, & rapists", but.......Murder innocent babies, & sell their body parts? ? ? ? ? ? It just doesn't get any more heinious, 'sub-human".....vile, & sinful, than that!.........{ that's the Liberal platform! }.......................... :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :shock: :arrow: :evil:

We've had a mixed economy for over a hundred years. If capitalism and a free market address the needs of society there is no room for socialism and certainly not communism. The only thing liberals want is an economic system that addresses the needs of the society that lives under it. When the economy fails we address it. But what you don't seem to recognize is that in 2008 we had a chance to take over the banking system, a huge chuck of the automotive system, and housing. Yet all three remain part of the free market today. Even health care remains part of the free market so if socialism and communism are our objectives why aren't we pursuing them when we have the opportunity?

You grumble and rumble about SOCIALISM and COMMUNISM but come time to draw disability, medicare, or social security you people are at the head of the line. Hell, my wifes best friend who is conservative through and through was more than happy to sign up for Obamacare until her new business gets on its feet and she is able to pay for it on her own. Stop whining about socialism when it plays such a big part of saving your collective asses. If you pass away early SS will step in and provide income for your children all the way through college and medicare will help with their healthcare. I know of not a single conservative who passed up on that offer, or for that matter, appreciate that they were there...

You do understand, or not, that Social Security is paid finto by working individuals and their employees. Social Security does not provide income to children after the age eighteen. If it does, I have a phone number you can call to provide guidance to an eighteen year attending college whose father died four years ago. Her survivor benefits stopped at eighteen.

Medicare is, again, a system paid into by employees and employers. Further, Medicare payments are deducted from Social Security recipients Social Security benefits, on a monthly basis.

Progressives always use Social Security and Medicare as an example of entitlements, when they are not. Perhaps it would be more appropriate to talk about Medicaid, welfare, housing subsidies, etc., which are government paid subsidies.