Spending Up for 2008 Presidential Race

Yeah, it's also definitely a much more ethical way to run a campaign. Democracy would be much better off if there was a bit more ethical campaigning. These days it's all about being a mouthpiece for those who pay for your campaign.

Jason I have one question for you. Just because he has the money coming in do you believe he is capable of running our country? He along with Hilary are aimed at the direction of Socialism. I don't want a Socialist nation. Just wondering why you want Obama.

I think the phrase "He along with Hillary are aimed at the direction of Socialism" is a extreme statement. I would respond (if we are talking in extreme hyperbolic terms) that Romney Giuliani are leaning the nation toward a totalitarian regime, even dictatorship. Perhaps more so than Bush.

Obviously, neither statement is true. Most political analysis put Clinton as the most moderate and Obama rather close. Doesn't make them good or bad, but one thing is true - they certainly aren't socialist.

@RepublicanChick18 -
I don't think we'll become a Socialist government simply because a Democrat takes office and that sort of talk is counter-productive when commenting on an article that is obviously written for a liberal audience; however, I do think it's important for conservatives to respectfully participate in the Democratic Primary conversations since it seems rather likely that we'll have a Democrat for President next term. Just trying to be practical...

@cenitwannabe -
the democratic nominees want the government to control all health care (hospitals, clinics, doctors offices, etc.) That is socalism. That is not how are country was set to be ran. I don't care how much liberals tell the american people that is their aim. socialism is in Europe it works for them. it would never work here. Americans love money. With socialism if you make $100 you get to keep between $20-$30 of that $100. The $70 -$80 goes to the government to provide half a$$ medical and police and anyother services to the people. Then more and more private business will open up because the government is not taking well enough care of the people.

@spencerific-
If Clinton is more moderate them I am a radical. I say that because moderates can lean to both sides. Clinton does not. She does not like the military, and half the time never knows what she is really talking about. Yes they are certainly socialists. They want governmentally run health and medical facilities and the last time I checked that was socialism.

RepublicanChick18 -

While I respect your opinion, I must again disagree. You wouldn't be a radical, you'd be a reactionary. Universal health care does have socialistic qualities, you are right. But, having universal health care does not make us a Socialist Nation. I do hope you are just exaggerating to make a point - if not, please look up what Socialism is. All large nations, in my opinion, need Socialistic qualities. Socialist ideas is what protects normal middle class citizens against large corporate America. I understand your fear of universal health care, but the fact one has universal health care does that make that country socialist.

Clinton and Obama are not socialists. Like most democrats, some of their policy has some socialistic qualities, but they are not socialists. I feel you are just trying to make a point - I just don't know what that is. If you truly believe Clinton and Obama are socalists, I'm not sure I can convince you otherwise - you seem pretty stubborn in your ideas.

What I was saying about being a radical is that Clinton is not as moderate as you state and it was a metaphor. Our Constitution was not set up to have any socialistic qualities. It starts with qualities and then ideas form and then they put it (socialism) into action. I know what socalism is and this is basically what it means Socialism is an economic system where the means of production are seized and monopolized by the government. (Universal health care.)

Under most of the Democratic plans, the Government isn't the health care provider for every citizen. Most plans allow private corporations to continue operation. Universal health care is based of socialistic principles, but I also believe every American should have the right to receive health care.

The Constitution was written in a simpler day. We must try and preserve its ideas while adjusting certain things to help manage today's world. Socialism didn't even exist as a mainstream idea or concept during the writing of the Constitution. Not for almost 100 years was socialism even thought of!!

a simpler time?? yeah a time when a new country was being founded, decided how to be run, how to make money, having the King basically turn his back on you, and more. I think that was so much simpler. Most of the Democratic plans the Government is the provider. I also believe that every american should have the right to health care. But there have been proven that Governmentally run facilities are worse off then privatized facilities. This is just what I believe. But I believe that Democrats want "socialistic qualities" with national health care because they are too lazy to work to get the health care. With the nationalized health care the illigal immigrants would also get the health care. Why don't we just have private health care so the LEGAL citizens get the benefits instead of the ILLEGAL people who think they can just come and get what ever they want.

First of all, It was a simpler time. There weren't computers, or telephones. There wasn't such a thing as a "Gay-marriage Issue," or a "Abortion issue." There wasn't a such a thing as stem cell research or a world moving closer to a Global view of itself. That doesn't mean it wasn't a difficult time. I envy none of the founding fathers for setting the basis of our governmental view.

The government already pays for everyone to have health care. If you go into the emergency room, you'll get care - and the government will more often than not pick up the bill! The argument is not, "Should we have a governmental health care system?" The question is "How can we cut costs, streamline care for over burdened hospitals, extend care to uninsured children and families, and improve care while figuring out these problems?" This is not a black and white question, and we are closer to socialistic health care than you think.

This is a complex issue and I think many people are highly uninformed on what is actually going on.

I know we are close to socialistic views that is what i have been saying from the getgo. socialism will not be good for this country. I am a very informed individual and I that this would not be good for our country.

Ok. I see you just want to make a point that Socialism is a concept is bad for America. I don't agree. I think some socialism is great! Agree to disagree. I can see you really don't wanna debate health care.. Sorry for wasting your time.

Have you read the constitution of our country? it was not writen for socialist views. It was written for the american people to survive via survival of the fittest. NO I don't agree everything is perfect. No I am not perfect. DO you believe that you are perfect? I never said that Obama is Stalin. If you want to know what I think Obama is. then I think Obama and Clinton are Sadam and Castro combined and Bush is Hitler. (That is how much I believe Obama and Clinton are bad for our country)

Jason first of all in the 21st century it is not we the people but rather me the people. My friend read your reply and brought up a really good point and here it is. We resently saw a movie about the government and the secrets that it keeps (trys) from the AMerican people. Just b/c you think its we the people does not mean it is. People don't care about each other so why do yyo think congroess will come to a decsion about this (don't bring up the majority bull)???????

Have you ever met a person from a socialistic country?? well I have and they dont like it at all. so why do you like it so much???

Since you always leave me with such wonderful quotes I wil leave you with one!
"Have you ever been raped????? Of course you have, you've paid taxes!" - A friend ANd you want to replace that with the same thing?? OK then bend over and kiss your butt GOODBYE!!!

Yes, I do believe the constitution allows for the government to be flexible to the wishes of the governed. It allows some basic rules, standards, and checks and balances to support the outer frame, then lets those elected fill in the details. Obviously, things change and the laws of the land must change. If the majority of this country wasn't a socialistic government (there isn't) there that is what it will become. I think any extreme would be bad.

I have BEEN to a socialist country, RepublicanChick18, and they don't ALL hate it. I think it is very similar to our own country. A few absolutely love it, some absolutely hate it, and most would like to see certain things changed (each viewpoint different). I understand that you don't like socialism, but there is a lot already implemented in our government that has much of its created based in those ideas. I do agree that a completely socialistic society and government within in Government would be extremely bad.

(I'm not following you, I promise) lol

first of all I never said that every person in a socialistic country hated it I said that the people I know really hate it. It seems to me that you don'nt know what you stand for b/c yyou started out not for socialism and now you sound like you are in the middle of the issue. "Ok. I see you just want to make a point that Socialism is a concept is bad for America. I don't agree. I think some socialism is great!" please pick a side!!!

This is not, and should not, be taken as a black and white issue. I am all for certain aspects of Socialism. I am not for a completely socialistic society. I like aspects of all sorts of governmental systems, and it is possible to have those parts within our government, if don't correctly. I think I've been very clear on this issue.

Liberal-

I agree with you. Democrats stink.
Socialism is and will make this country worse then it is already. They need to realize that socialism will not help but hinder us. The people don't probably know what would have to be given up inorder to have a socialistic country.

Liberals are not Socialists. Socialists are Socialists.

Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. A liberal society is characterized by freedom of thought for individuals, limitations on power, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market economy, free private enterprise, and a transparent system of government in which the rights of all citizens are protected. In the 21st century, this usually means liberal democracy with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law.

In my Con Ed class we were told that Democrats were liberals and liberals are more keen to socialist idea's. Look @ Hilary she has socialist idea's and Obama he teo has socialist idea's so don't tell me that liberals are socialists because they are!!!I don't exactly think you know what socialism is!!!! I'm not sure if you are aware but ummm national health care is a SOCIALIST IDEA!!!!!!!

I'm sorry, perhaps the dictionary is wrong. That is the definition of a liberal.

Socialism refers to a broad array of ideologies and movements which aim to improve society through collective and egalitarian action; and to a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community. This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state or worker ownership of the means of production.

Now, It is possible to have a Liberal Socialist (Maintaining individual rights and freedoms while having the government in control of economic systems). But a being a Liberal does NOT make you a socialist. It just doesn't. You can yell and scream your your political prejudice all you like, but just because you "took a class" and a "teacher told you" doesn't make your words true. I think it is silly that someone has to explain to you basic concepts of Liberalism and Socialism because you are too thick headed and stubborn to admit that maybe they could be different.

Grow up.

Being a liberal does not make you a socialist but you have the socialist ideas in you so basically you are a socialist. It is like saying that a terrorist is not a terrorist unless he does something.

You should seriously grow up. all we are doing is stating our positions and you are getting all pissed and annoyed. We are not thick headed we are oppinionated. We believe the liberals to be socialist and Conservatives to be other wise. I know that there are a couple conservatives who have socialist ideas but mainly it is the Liberals who have the strong Socialist presence and ideas.

GROW UP!

You're right. This is not the correct forum for this sort of "debate." I find it unfortunate that you have no interest what so ever to talk about subjects. You obviously have your mind made up. I do hope you figure out what kind of conservative you are - there are about 8-10 kinds after all. There are social conservatives out there, quite of few of them. Anyway, I'm not going to go further in this one-sided debate (considering I'm the only one apparently interested in actually debating).

Oh, one more definition.
"Conservatism is any of several historically-related political philosophies or political ideologies. There are also a number of Conservative political parties in various countries. They usually identify with the political right. Often thought as resistant to change and opposing to liberal reforms."

Synonyms include : inflexible, obstinate, orthodox, unchangeable, uncreative, unimaginative, and unprogressive.

Untracking Thread.

I guess we shut Spencerific up!!haha!!