djplong--- Nobel prize winner, Alexander Solynitzyor said, "communism is socialism done by professionals."

I must agree with Michael Savage
 

Unfortunately I don't believe it is curable.

I thought he said liberalism was a mental disorder.

Donna2--- Savage did say liberism is a mental disorder. Hopefully, that's what they meant.

Savage
 

Yes, sorry I misquoted. Liberalism is a mental disorder.......that is what Michael said.

I really hate to generalize and do not believe that ALL Democrats are socialists, however the current leadership and power base of the party leans strongly in that direction.

George Will today addresses this very subject in his editorial...

"Only two things are infinite -- the expanding universe and Democrats' hostility to the District of Columbia's school choice program. Killing this small program, which currently benefits 1,300 mostly poor and minority children, is odious and indicative. It is a small piece of something large -- the Democrats' dependency agenda, which aims to multiply the ways Americans are dependent on government.

Democrats, in their canine devotion to teachers unions, oppose empowering poor children to escape dependency on even terrible government schools. Unions and their poodles say school choice siphons money from public schools. But federal money funds D.C.'s program, so killing it denies education money to D.C. while increasing the number of pupils D.C. must support.

Most Democrats favor a "public option" -- a government health insurance program. They say there is insufficient competition among the 1,300 private providers of insurance, so people should not be dependent on those insurers. But tuition vouchers redeemable at private as well as public schools is a "private option" providing minimal competition with public schools. Government, with 89 percent of the pupils, dominates education grades K through 12. So, do Democrats favor vouchers to reduce American's dependence on government education? Of course not.

For congressional Democrats, however, expanding dependency on government is an end in itself. They began the Obama administration by expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program. It was created for children of the working poor but the expansion made millions of middle-class children eligible -- some in households earning $125,000. The aim was to swell the number of people who grow up assuming that dependency on government health care is normal."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...cy_agenda.html

There has always been a difference between the parties in regard to the role of federal government, but the current administration and congress are taking this to a new level which is spawning so much of the distress and movements such as the Tea Bag movement.

I KNOW there are moderate democrats around who are cringing at what is happening in Washington (It is not JUST Republicans) and here is hoping we vote in reasonable folks of any party this November and maybe create some sanity. No wonder the "currents" are in such a hurry and have been to get as much "done" as possible before some sanity resumes.

And for those who will immediately get on thier party bandwagon and remind that the Republcan party also got carried away...I agree....but the degree to which these current folks are taking the extreme is scary !

PS..To further validate the point...from the LA Times...

[B]"Reporting from Washington - As President Obama's approval ratings sag and the mood of voters sours, some Democratic congressional candidates are distancing themselves from the White House, with the back-channel blessing of party officials.

The candidates are positioning themselves as independent voices no less frustrated with the Obama administration than people back home.

Rep. Dennis Cardoza, a Democrat who represents a California Central Valley district burdened by high unemployment and home foreclosures, said in an interview: "The Obama administration has failed miserably in trying to solve the problem."[/B

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-a...,2394992.story

I agree Bucco
 

With the election of Obama, I think we have witnessed what the Progressive Democrats of America thought would be a perfect storm to get many of their issues passed into law. Not all Dems are members of the Progressive Party, but most members of the Progressive Party have Democratic Party roots, IMHO. I just think what many in this country are identifying as "socialist" causes are actually Progressive causes.

The PDA's strategy:

http://pdamerica.org/about/strategy.php

The PDA's board of directors:

http://pdamerica.org/about/board.php

Thank you for those links. Very telling list, indeed.

:agree::agree::agree:


Bravo....I got the same education from my grandmother and my father. Red-baiting should be a thing of the past.

And why would anyone care what a disgraced mean drunk would think? But the way did you hear about Dick Cheney yet?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1379283/posts

History is on his side, as facts are, too.

And why would anyone care what a disgraced mean drunk would think? But the way did you hear about Dick Cheney yet?

Enough!

cologal
 

This isn't baiting you cologal. It is a an honest question for discussion. Have you ever heard of Arthurdale, WVa.? Your friend, B.K.

I don't know how a liberal can talk like that. You people talk about compassion and then call people terrible names. You forget that your "darling" of the democrat party, Ted Kennedy was the biggest alcohol abuser in congress.