George W. Bush Joins Facebook

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Dirty Durden

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2009
30
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]Yeah, and North Korea is called the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The name itself doesn't mean anything. It's pointless to compare Republicans or Democrats in the US to Nazis, there is simply no comparison. Nazis had one-of-a-kind ideology and the reason they're so despised isn't their extreme right (or left) wing ideas but their xenophobia/racism, militarism, expansionism... which led to the murder of millions of jews, gypsies, gays, communists and others.As for Obama, he may be slightly left-leaning but he's no socialist. Bernie Sanders is socialist but so what? I don't get where all the histeria about socialism is coming from anyway. Socialism gave us the 40 hour work week, paid vacations, health insurance, maternity leave and the minimum wage... also social security and medicare in the US. Because of socialism, we don't have 10 year old children working 12 hour shifts at the coal mine.[/citation]

You are a joke, that is all I can say. You really believe the Marxist Pigs care about the people, one word Nazis. Look at the news about flotilla, look at how all of the left wing media (Marxist Pigs)threaded Israel. The whole world is siding with the enemies & so are you.
 

ravewulf

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
394
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]blurr91[/nom]BP oil spill was due to government regulation.Is it easier to fix a blown out well on land or in 5000' of water?Is it cheaper to get oil on land or from 5000' of water?Why did BP have to drill in 5000' of water?Answer: the government, prodded by the environmentalists, wouldn't let anyone drill on land for fear of "pollution." Let's see your pollution now.[/citation]
Now that's a laugh. Talk about turning the facts on their head. And all of this brought to you by Rush Limbaugh.

If there was actual regulation in place, they would have actually checked to make sure the safety mechanisms worked. Instead they decided to "save money" and not check (they are very short sighted that way. Now it's costing them more than if they had actually checked the safety mechanisms). Hell, if there was actual regulation they wouldn't have been allowed to do off-shore drilling in the first place. Oil will be gone soon enough, we need to look to other sources of energy.
 

ravewulf

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
394
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]Dirty Durden[/nom]You are a joke, that is all I can say. You really believe the Marxist Pigs care about the people, one word Nazis. Look at the news about flotilla, look at how all of the left wing media (Marxist Pigs)threaded Israel. The whole world is siding with the enemies & so are you.[/citation]
Why does no one look at http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 ? Seriously.

"Both an economic dimension and a social dimension are important factors for a proper political analysis. By adding the social dimension you can show that Stalin was an authoritarian leftist (ie the state is more important than the individual) and that Gandhi, believing in the supreme value of each individual, is a liberal leftist. While the former involves state-imposed arbitrary collectivism in the extreme top left, on the extreme bottom left is voluntary collectivism at regional level, with no state involved."

"The chart also makes clear that, despite popular perceptions, the opposite of fascism is not communism but anarchism (ie liberal socialism), and that the opposite of communism ( i.e. an entirely state-planned economy) is neo-liberalism (i.e. extreme deregulated economy)"

For economics, Stalin was on the left, Hitler was on the right. The more important axis to look at in this case is the social one. Both Hitler and Stalin were extreme on the authoritarian/fascism end. Gandhi on the other hand was on the moderate left economically and moderate libertarian socially.

The social axis makes a world of difference when examining political positions!
 

killerclick

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2010
459
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]ravewulf[/nom]The social axis makes a world of difference when examining political positions![/citation]

Remember you're talking to people who are listening to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. They've been convinced Obama is a socialist marxist nazi atheist muslim born in Kenya who hates America and wants to destroy it. There is nothing in that statement they'd disagree on so... good luck. :)
 

ta152h

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2009
297
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]ltgrunt[/nom]TA152H, Socialism is an economic system, but it also has enormous political ramifications, as any and all economic systems do. Pretending that it's not at all political and is purely economic is just as bad as thinking that anyone in mainstream US politics right now is in any way Socialist.You're really not painting a very flattering picture of yourself by defending the Nazis and espousing the great points of totalitarianism, by the way. And yes, based on their actions as a collective whole the Nazis were most definitely Xenophobic; you do remember that whole Holocaust thing, right? And the annexation of Austria certainly wasn't a reclamation of a pre-WWI German territory, but you seem to be ignoring that.[/citation]

Actually, unlike you, I'm not here to paint myself as anything, I'm just saying it like it is. I'm not saying one is better than the other, since they are each better at certain things.

For the dolts that say totalitarian governments are inherently bad, you need to read your history books. Some are good, some are bad, based on their leader. Napoleon, for example, spread a legal system throughout Europe that was far more fair than existing ones. Germany under Bismarck prospered greatly.

Now, back to our history lesson. Austrians are Germans. Austria wanted to join Germany after WW I, but the victors of WW I prevented it. The only reason Austria is not part of Germany was because of a war between Prussia and Austria in 1866, in which Prussia won. Because of that, Prussia gained hegemony in "Germany", and later became the country that unified it after defeating the French. Had Austria won the war, it would have turned out differently. In fact, Prussians and south Germans were culturally very different, the Prussians being very militaristic and regimented.

I guess you don't know what Xenophobic means. It means they feared foreigners. In fact, during WW II, many foreigners were imported into Germany to work on production lines. There were some groups that were persecuted, of course, but not all, and thus if falls short of xenophobic. It was more targeted basically against Slavic and Semitic people.

Your thinking is very imprecise. Your example of Austria was wrong, of course, but I had mentioned Germany had taken the non-Teutonic areas of Czech before demanding Danzig, so their motives were clear. But, the actual event that triggered the war was the restoration of Danzig, which was 99% German, to Germany.

Your thinking of economics and politics is equally imprecise. They are related of course, but they are not the same. That Marxism is generally totalitarian has always seemed strange, since it's a Utopian ideal. But, you could easily have Marxism in a democratic state. Socialism could also be Democratic or Autocratic. There is a correlation, but it is far from absolute.
 

southernshark

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2009
310
0
18,930
0
The NAZIS clearly were socialists. They had nationalized health care, national education, and the government essentially controlled industry and production. The Government also controlled the media. So it was clearly a socialist state.

Now that doesn't mean that every socialist state is a NAZI state. If you look at Sweden, for example, you will see a socialist state which is functionally very different from the socialist state found in NAZI Germany.
 

killerclick

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2010
459
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]southernshark[/nom]The NAZIS clearly were socialists. They had nationalized health care, national education, and the government essentially controlled industry and production. The Government also controlled the media. So it was clearly a socialist state.[/citation]

Socialism has nothing to do with controlling the media or education or healthcare. Socialism is about maintaining social stability by promoting greater economic equality.

Germany had a lot of private businesses with giants like Siemens, Volkswagen, BMW, Mercedes, Opel, IG Farben... none of these were state owned. Sure, the state controlled production to an extent but just because of the impending war (after all customer calls the shots and the state was the biggest customer).

Again, the problem with Nazi Germany, what made them such a horrible regime isn't their economic system or even their political system but their racism, xenophobia, militarism and expansionism. Put all that stuff together and it doesn't matter how and if you distribute wealth and if you have elections or not.
 

Regulas

Distinguished
May 11, 2008
520
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]Nazis were no more socialist than the Democratic Republic of Korea is democratic.And the Nazis are hated not because they were left or right wing or conservative or liberal, rather because of their militarism, nationalism, racism and xenophobia, that caused them to start illegal wars and prosecute minorities. Sound familiar?[/citation]
idiot
 

Regulas

Distinguished
May 11, 2008
520
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]Genocidal regimes come to power because of people like you![/citation]
So you are proven wrong so resort to Blasphemy, figures, liberal scum.
 

Repelsteeltje

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2008
50
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]rishwin[/nom]So this is news telling us that someone made a fan page for him? Basically, this entire article has ZERO relevance to George Bush at all, gratz on making a completely irrelevant title.Can i be on the front page tomorrow if i make a fan page for Obama?[/citation]

Yes, you can!
 

joytech22

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2008
651
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]regulas[/nom]Idiot, Bush was and will go down as a much better president than the Marxist hack we have in there now. This was on the news and was said not to be from him. Bush would be the only reason I would want to join Facebook, NOT.[/citation]

I'm the one who provided your 20'th thumbs down, I WANT TO BE ON FRONT PAGE PL0X
 

Dirty Durden

Distinguished
Aug 2, 2009
30
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]ravewulf[/nom]Why does no one look at http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 ? Seriously."Both an economic dimension and a social dimension are important factors for a proper political analysis. By adding the social dimension you can show that Stalin was an authoritarian leftist (ie the state is more important than the individual) and that Gandhi, believing in the supreme value of each individual, is a liberal leftist. While the former involves state-imposed arbitrary collectivism in the extreme top left, on the extreme bottom left is voluntary collectivism at regional level, with no state involved.""The chart also makes clear that, despite popular perceptions, the opposite of fascism is not communism but anarchism (ie liberal socialism), and that the opposite of communism ( i.e. an entirely state-planned economy) is neo-liberalism (i.e. extreme deregulated economy)"For economics, Stalin was on the left, Hitler was on the right. The more important axis to look at in this case is the social one. Both Hitler and Stalin were extreme on the authoritarian/fascism end. Gandhi on the other hand was on the moderate left economically and moderate libertarian socially.The social axis makes a world of difference when examining political positions![/citation]

Plain & simple, you give Government to which power they abuse it & you get Hitler or a Stalin. Your problem & people like you trust other people too much. It does not matter who it is, you give them too much power they will exploit us (unless it George Washington).
In America, in the beginning we were setup a little to the left of anarchy. Not too much power, just enough to make it work. The problem is when Europeans comes to America to make America Europe we are not Europe. If you want European style Government go back to Europe.
 

ravewulf

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
394
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]Dirty Durden[/nom]Plain & simple, you give Government to which power they abuse it & you get Hitler or a Stalin. Your problem & people like you trust other people too much. It does not matter who it is, you give them too much power they will exploit us (unless it George Washington). In America, in the beginning we were setup a little to the left of anarchy. Not too much power, just enough to make it work. The problem is when Europeans comes to America to make America Europe we are not Europe. If you want European style Government go back to Europe.[/citation]
If you actually look at the political compass' on the site you would see that the Republicans are a lot closer to Hitler than the Democrats. That's not to say that the Democrats are good either, cause they're not. We need to go a lot more to the libertarian side socially (we are far too close to the authoritarian side for my liking) and toward the left economically.

Again I point to these links
http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 (Hitler, Stalin, Gandhi, Bush, The Dalai Lama)
http://www.politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2008 (US 2008 Primaries)

And just cause you brought up Europe, I'll throw these in too
http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010 (UK Parties 2010)
http://www.politicalcompass.org/euchart (EU Governments 2008)
 

techguy378

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2009
264
0
18,930
0
George W Bush does have his own personal Facebook page that he himself created as well. It was also in the news. The one being shown here may not be it though.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I used to think that I hated Bush until I got to see whats going on now.
 

Regulas

Distinguished
May 11, 2008
520
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]Socialism has nothing to do with controlling the media or education or healthcare. Socialism is about maintaining social stability by promoting greater economic equality.Germany had a lot of private businesses with giants like Siemens, Volkswagen, BMW, Mercedes, Opel, IG Farben... none of these were state owned. Sure, the state controlled production to an extent but just because of the impending war (after all customer calls the shots and the state was the biggest customer). Again, the problem with Nazi Germany, what made them such a horrible regime isn't their economic system or even their political system but their racism, xenophobia, militarism and expansionism. Put all that stuff together and it doesn't matter how and if you distribute wealth and if you have elections or not.[/citation]
More statement from what me be a public education by union solidarity teachers. Wrong you dumb ass, now go back to school and find the truth and quit reading communist web sites to get your propaganda.
 

shin0bi272

Distinguished
Nov 20, 2007
271
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]ltgrunt[/nom]I'll give you Bernie, Shinobi, but that's being generous given that he platforms Independent and identifies himself as a Democratic Socialist, which is itself a far cry from proper Socialism.And no, there are no Communists in mainstream US politics right now; Communism demands fast, violent revolution against political, social and economic elites. Ignoring everything else against the "Communists" argument, these people cannot be Communists for the simple reason that they are working within the system to accomplish goals, while the Communist ideal is to basically destroy the system and build something new, a was the case with Soviet Russia.As for the allegation that progressives are Socialist, that simply falls in line with the "calling things Socialist when one doesn't know what Socialism really is" category. Considering the fact that Teddy Roosevelt was a Progressive - back before the Progressive Party was called the Bull-Moose Party - it's a hard call to align Progressives with Socialists.[/citation]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Progressive_Caucus

Van jones - obama's "green jobs czar" was a communist but was fired for being a 9/11 truth'er http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Jones#Earlier_activism

The entire point of the progressives has become to collapse the system from within under the weight of the government... its called the cloward and piven strategy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward%E2%80%93Piven_strategy

They are increasing the size of government every time an emergency arises or new president is elected. Obama is doing it, Bush did it, Clinton did it too. Damned near every president has increased the size of the federal government since Jefferson.

The difference between the progressives here and the communists in europe is simple... communists want revolution (usually violent), progressives want evolution... both end at the same place! Total government!

Socialism -

1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or 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

Knowing the definition to socialism and that its part of marxist theory that will eventually lead to communism lets look at what the government runs now shall we? GM, Chrysler, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (i.e. 96.2% of all mortgages in the US), now they have their fingers in health care, they are getting into further regulating the stock market, Are pushing to put a tax on co2 (which even the director of the chicago climate exchange says that if we stopped all co2 production and brought the entire economy to a halt it wouldnt cool the planet like the climate freaks want... and hes a lefty!). They've taken over the student loan program so you have to get a loan from the government to go to college if you need a loan. What they dont own or take over they regulate or tax. 40 years ago only 1 in 20 businesses needed a license to operate... now its 1 in 3!

Look at Greece the union members THAT'S GOVERNMENT UNION MEMBERS in the Greek government rioted in the streets and burned buildings down (killing 3 people) when the government (whos debt to gdp ratio is 125%) said they had to cut spending.

@ravenwolf A better chart is the nolan chart (found at http://www.nolanchart.com/)

Communism, Socialism and Fascism are totalitarian states like an oligarchy. Anarchy and republics are no government or small government respectively. In europe the left is communism and the right is fascism but they are both leading down the same road to totalitarianism. they are the left and right lanes of a highway to hell essentially.
 

ElMoIsEviL

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2006
25
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]regulas[/nom]idiot[/citation]
How is he an idiot for stating fact?

neoliberalism (Obama), or neoconservatism (George W. Bush) both hold similar policies to the Nazi party of old. But just as killerclick was stating... economic/social policies =/= support for mass genocide.

I mean if you look at where Xenophobia, Racism, Sexism and Homophobia come from... you'll notice that it is tied to Social Conservatism (the right-wingers such as Sarah Palin and Co.. you know them as the Tea Baggers).

Now not all Tea Baggers are Xenophobic, Racist, Sexist Homophobes but chances are that if you are a Xenophobic, Racist, Sexist Homophobe... you're also a Tea Bagger. :p

I, myself, am a Left-Libertarian (the intelligent people). I understand that hierarchical structures tend to be the issue (not simply the "state" or "government"). Therefore I include Unregulated Capitalism into the equation (as it is inherently hierarchical). As as we've seen with BP, Imperial Oil, Haliburton and other Conglomerates (or Maple LEaf Foods in Canada) etc... the profit motive does, often times, work against the needs of society and of the whole... with destructive consequences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
I Streaming Video & TVs 0
M Streaming Video & TVs 5
I Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
Marshall Honorof Streaming Video & TVs 8
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 10
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 15
G Streaming Video & TVs 36
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 1
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 17
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 21
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 17
G Streaming Video & TVs 14
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 58
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 9
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 35
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 50
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 53
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 79

ASK THE COMMUNITY