Allen West sound just plain foolish. Good lord, are we now going to revert back to the “red scare” and start having hearings on rooting out the “communists”!
Solidad handled this beautifully. West is smart enough to realize that actually individually naming names of his colleagues may look untoward so thinks better of taking that final step, which really, in my opinion, solidifies the inanity of his communist blather.
Was Teddy Roosevelt a Communist? I hope not, but he sure was a Progressive! He was President during a very contentious period in American history. Remember the “square deal”? He was a strong advocate for fair labor contracts and busting up corporate monopolies. He created the first federal department to ensure the health of food products and safety of drugs.
Lets not forget our first National Parks also and push to protect our natural resources. Not sure how progress became a dirty word, but shame on West for scraping the bottom of the barrel to insult his fellow congressmen and congresswomen.
Thomas Jefferson was a progressive. Does anyone here really believe the Declaration of Independence was not a “progressive” forward thinking document?
Read about the Progressive Caucus here.
Its 11:38….here’s your chance. Turn on Glenn Beck and you can hear West speak about this.
This person explains it better than I can.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=50960
Its amazing how similar the Progressive Promise is to the CPUSA Bill of Rights Socialism:
Bill of Rights Socialism would maintain and extend democratic rights in the U.S.the rights to free speech, to free assembly, to freedom of religion, to a secular government, to be free from corporate domination, and to be free of unwarranted government intervention in the lives of individuals.
A socialist United States will guarantee all the freedoms we have won over centuries of struggle, and also extend the Bill of Rights to include freedom from unemployment, from poverty, from illiteracy, and from discrimination and oppression. Socialism will guarantee the right to vote, to health care, to a job at a living wage, to decent housing. With socialism, pensions and social programs take priority over new weapons systems that protect only the profits of the defense industry. Socialism will bring a peaceful foreign policy that will not threaten other peoples or countries with invasion, domination, or war. Essential to achieving and maintaining socialism is a fight from the start for the complete elimination of all forms of special oppression.
Every single one of the caucus members are statists. Some advocate unconstitutional ideas such as random searches of citizens on transportation. Others advocate outright socialism. Others are just batsh%t crazy.
Oh, and I forgot.
While McCarthy’s tactics were wrong. He did abuse is power, but….his information in many cases was absolutely correct as has been proven by evidence revealed in the the fall of the Soviet Union and other in the Venona Intercepts.
Here’s some info from a different point of view, some of which I already knew.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/24716
Sorry Cargo,
I just compared your statement to the progressive caucus website, the tenents they espouse don’t seem radical at all, in fact, I agree with most of them. Which ones, specifically, do you disagree with?
Is there language that suggests capitalism in its true form is abolished?
Their promises are very nice pablum. Let’s see how they mean to implement them.
» To uphold the right to universal access to affordable, high quality healthcare for all.
How does one do that without socializing medicine?
» To preserve guaranteed Social Security benefits for all Americans, protect private pensions, and require corporate accountability.
How about CONGRESSIONAL accountability – they are the ones that have squandered SS, pensions, and made the rules for corporations.
» To export more American products and not more American jobs and demand fair trade.
Ok. How? They were in total control of the government. How did they make US industry more competitive? Where were their tariffs? Trade war anybody? How do we make industry produce more when Democrat polices make energy hugely expensive, labor expensive, and over-regulating stifles business.
» To reaffirm freedom of association and enforce the right to organize.
Freedom of association? Really? Try it and you fall afoul of PC and Hate laws. And everyone has the right to organize. And to NOT organize.
» To ensure working families can live above the poverty line and with dignity by raising and indexing the minimum wage.
Hard to do when minimum wages restrict hiring.
» To sunset expiring provisions of the Patriot Act and bring remaining provisions into line with the U. S. Constitution.
I call BS on this one because statists LOVE the Patriot Act as long as THEY are in charge. I don’t see any Democrat calls against Obama for allowing the indefinite detention and killing of American citizens.
» To protect the personal privacy of all Americans from unbridled police powers and unchecked government intrusion.
TSA? Increased surveillance under Obama? More IRS under Obamacare? Obamacare? Card Check?
» To extend the Voting Rights Act and reform our electoral processes.
No longer needed. Reform our electoral processes? In what way?
» To fight corporate consolidation of the media and ensure opportunity for all voices to be heard.
That’s called competition. They have heard of the internet, right? And its THEIR buddies that are merging.
» To ensure enforcement of all legal rights in the workplace.
Pablum. Already have enforcement. Sounds good, but doesn’t mean anything. What do THEY mean?
» To eliminate all forms of discrimination based upon color, race, religion, gender, creed, disability, or sexual orientation.
Freedom of association is important, right? But they do have a good point. And this is an ongoing thing in America already. I wonder if they’ll stop discriminating based upon political affiliation.
» To honor and help our overburdened international public servants – both military and civilian. Very nice. So…how do they mean to help. I bet my idea is different than theirs. More pablum. Need specifics.
» To bring U. S. troops home from Iraq as soon as possible.
I agree. Done. I bet we would have finished sooner without Reid and Obama’s resistance. Still waiting to hear the word “victory” from the CINC.
» To re-build U.S. alliances around the world, restore international respect for American power and influence, and reaffirm our nation’s constructive engagement in the United Nations and other multilateral organizations.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!…..whew…..that’s funny.
» To enhance international cooperation to reduce the threats posed by nuclear proliferation and weapons of mass destruction.
Sounds good. China is helping N. Korea and Russia is helping Iran. And Pakistan has stopped cooperating. How’s that working out?
» To increase efforts to combat hunger and the scourge of HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, and other infectious diseases.
More than the billions sent to Africa by Bush? And you know what would help fight malaria….DDT.
» To encourage debt relief for poor countries and support efforts to reach the UN’s Millennium Goals for Developing Countries.
Yep. That’s what we need. Loan MORE money, a global tax, to poor countries and then tell them that they don’t have to pay us back. You know, with all that money that WE have. WE are a poor country.
4. Advancing Environmental Protection & Energy Independence » To free ourselves and our economy from dependence upon imported oil and shift to growing reliance upon renewable energy supplies and technologies, thus creating at least three million new jobs, cleansing our environment, and enhancing our nation’s security.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Try to launch a jet on solar power.
» To promote environmental justice in affirmation that all people have an inherent right to a healthy environment, clean air, and clean water wherever we live, work, and relax.
Fine. Cleaning the environment is a great cause. But say that. Any phrase that has the word “justice” is been a codeword for gov’t mandated socialism.
» To change incentives in federal tax, procurement, and appropriation policies to:
In other words…. subsidies.
(A) Speed commercialization of solar, biomass, and wind power generation, while encouraging state and local policy innovation to link clean energy and job creation;
If it DOESN’T work, you can’t speed a damn thing. And you STILL need a coal plant to back up the green energy like wind.
(B) Convert domestic assembly lines to manufacture highly efficient vehicles, enhance global competitiveness of U.S. auto industry, and expand consumer choice;
“highly efficient vehicles”? You mean like the diesels in Europe that are not to be imported to the US. And the US auto industry is doing just fine….oh wait. FORD is doing just fine. Chrysler is owned by Fiat. GM is owned by the unions and still owes the taxpayer billions. And the “highly efficient” Volt is a complete and utter failure.
(C) Increase investment in construction of “green buildings” and more energy-efficient homes and workplaces;
First we actually have to be CONSTRUCTING anything.
(D) Link higher energy efficiency standards in appliances to consumer and manufacturing incentives that increase demand for new durable goods and increase investment in U.S. factories.
Yep. Make even MORE crappy appliances that can’t clean anything, needs more water to complete cycles, and are more expensive for less capability.
» To eliminate environmental threat posed by global warming and ensuring that America does our part to advance an effective global problem-solving approach.
Man-made global warming is junk science and a scam. Any warming, of which there has not been any since 1998, is due to the sun. CO2 is NOT a pollutant and has not been proven to increase temperatures.
» To expand energy-efficient transportation choices by increasing investment in synthesized networks, including bicycle, local bus and rail transit, regional high-speed rail and magnetic levitation rail projects.
If people want them, private companies will build it.
» To preserve prudent public interest regulations that encourage sustainable growth and investment, ensure energy diversity and system reliability, protect workers and the environment, reward consumer conservation, and support an expanding marketplace that rewards the commercialization of energy-efficient technologies.
Nice recap of government action programs that restrict free enterprise, described in pretty phrases.
There were some of these tenents you did agree with though right? At least in theory. but you are right, the “devil is in the details”. Germany seems to have a really good affordable health care system. Maybe we should look to some successful countries and see how we could implement them here. Also, the idea of green energy is only so “portable”. You are right, solar won’t power a plane, but just because it can’t power a plane, doesn’t mean we can’t innovate for homes or businesses! Aren’t we the country of the atom bomb!
@Elena
I agree. Let’s innovate. Private business can do it. Make it affordable and we’ll buy it. In the mean time, don’t restrict access to fossil fuels.
The tenets that I did agree with were so generic that a reasonable man cannot disagree.
I guess that is how I look at too. Have you read about the model in Germany for solar etc? Government creates the initial investment to bring price down and then private entities can afford to get in on the “green” energy. We would have LOVED to have put up solar panels for our mini roof on the deck, but it was cost prohibitive.
If government put in an initial investment to make their building more energy efficient, that would create the demand,that would bring the cost down, thus allowing average citizens like us to buy panels and there you go, private/public partnership and everyone saves money on their electric bills trying to cool their homes in summertime!
Unfortunately, even with subsidies, those businesses are failing.
Solyndra? Billions loaned with subsidized production?
Besides, we don’t HAVE the money for the investment. We are broke. and owe trillions.
Soledad comes off as the hyper-partisan she is. CNN should stick to maliciously editing audio tapes to skew the perceptions of their audience (what’s left of it) like they did with the Trayvon Martin shooting. Note at the end how the head of the Communist Party sticks up for his fellow Communists! Anyone surprised??
We can’t even get bike trails put in Prince William County or the City of Manassas. Those have been in planning for a long time and are always the first to meet the chopping block.
When I was coming along, being called a communist was right up there with someone being asked to be punched in the nose. It is insulting. Everything we did worked against communism. So, today, if I am called that, pardon me if I tell the caller what they can go do to themselves.
Perhaps Mr. West will just settle for being called a Nazi and everyone can go home. The problem with this is, it’s just unproductive speech and immature. Why hang policial labels on people or groups?
Meanwhile, there is nothing wrong with goals. Let’s take one of the things Elena mentioned in her post, National Parks. I am all for this communist move if that is what it is. natioanl parks preserve land, flora, fauna, and other resources for our posterity. We have all seen what happens to these things if not protected. They are destroyed. Read some of the accounts of what was done to Yellowstone before the government took it over. Its truly sad.
I am going to suggest that it probably isn’t a good idea to call people in this country communists. It is unacceptable and I did too many nuclear drills as a kid to accept it here on this blog.
You want to call Castro one, fine.
Allen West is another big mouth who gets mad when he is called to task for his incredible rudeness. I could care less what Soledad O’Brien does at other times. She is right on here. I also didn’t hear him apologize to her over what he said about how she got her own name.
West is just a flame thrower with little mental brawn behind his assertations.
What do we call the opposite of communists? Hmmmmmm obedience to the elite and doing their bidding ?
Placing the wealth and the power in the hands of the elite few? Follow orders written by the elite.
It sounds to me like this is the goal of many of you right now. When I listen to middle class people defending the rich and protecting them from paying the same RATE we pay for taxes I have to ask, what are you really giving away?
Corporations have now obtained the same right as the individual?
I think we should probably be worried about things other than communism.
The opposite of communists?
American patriots.
Or also, Libertarians.
The two groups overlap.
@Cargo
Wrong.
Don’t be an elitist.
That comment sickens me. There are plenty of people out there who don’t think like you do who are very much patriots. Define patriot.
I obviously mean in general terms.
Sickens you? What kind of knee jerk reaction is that? Did I specifically separate anyone or define patriot? No…. I just said American patriot.
How is that elitist? The opposite of communists, those who follow a philosophy that has resulted in over 100 million deaths in the 20th century…..are American Patriots.
Doesn’t that include EVERYONE, conservative and liberal, of all parties, that don’t follow the communist philosophy?
Isn’t the free market and ordered liberty of the US Constitution anathema to the totalitarianism of communism? Respecting individual rights and freedoms the opposite of collectivism?
I just added the Libertarians because the are POLITICALLY as far away from communism as you can get, but not all of them are patriots. I know some self-admitted NON-patriots. And that’s ok. That’s their problem.
Knee jerk reaction? My knee jerk reactions usually have a target and that is also a demeaning expression. It sickens me. I know what you just said. In the first place, when American patriots first came on the scene, there was no such thing as communism. It isn’t the opposite of communist.
Sorry, you don’t have to espouse the free market and ordered liberty to be a patriot. Patriot is just another one of those words to make someone else be an “other” these days.
There can be some very collective patriots.
I stand by my elitism statement. To you, people are only patriotic, or so it seems, if they think like you do.
Patriotism is simply love and support of one’s country.
There is a good op-ed by Gene Robinson on the incendiary rhetoric of Nugent and West.
He says: “This is what distinguishes the flame-throwers of the far right from those of the far left. Nugent and his ilk seek to deny their political opponents the very right to believe in a different philosophy. Agree with me, he says, or be stomped.”
“Robinson goes on to say: West can’t really believe this nonsense. What he’s trying to do is delegitimize the entire stream of progressive thought that has run wide and deep through American history since the nation’s founding. Disagree with his views, West insists, and you’re not just a political opponent, you’re a godless Marxist. There is no symmetry here. The far left may hurl insults at the right but doesn’t scream “fascism” whenever a Republican proposes privatizing Medicare.”
There are “real Americans” and “real patriots” across the spectrum … real idiots may disagree.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republican-rhetoric-that-damages-the-nation/2012/04/19/gIQAlPH8TT_story.html
Well, Robinson should know, being the race-baiting, partisan hack he always is.
hmmmm….nothing partisan about that statement, is there, Emma.
Did you read the article? Apparently, liberals never smear their political opposition or engage in over-the-top hyperbole. Oh, really?
Is Allen West a liberal? I didn’t realize that. Is it too awful to discuss his behavior?
Who remembers Max Cleland? I sure do. Allow me to refresh my memories here. West is behaving foolish and should be embarrassed by his silly communit reference.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14474-2002Jun19.html
So…back to finding that those that support the American way of life, based upon the Constitution, are being called American patriots is an elitist thing to say…….
Why is that an elitist statement? My only qualification for patriot was that the person believe in the Constitution and wishes to support it. How can being a communist, a believer in a system that removes the rights of individuals, that places individual rights subservient to the state, a believer in a system that has killed over 100 million people since 1917, and wishes to make the US more communistic, NOT be non-patriotic?
You asked what is the opposite of communism. My belief is that a system that believes in individual freedom and rights, as demonstrated by the American system, guided by the Constitution… ie., ordered liberty.
There are people I consider patriots who want to change the Constitution.
I wanted you to give me a word…a political system word.
I don’t think Patriotism has much to do with the Constitution.
All the sqawking over communism is silly. West should know better. Just another buffoon.
I am just smiling over what happens historically when the wealth is just in the hands of a few….many Republicans are trying to keep going.
“What he’s trying to do is delegitimize the entire stream of progressive thought that has run wide and deep through American history since the nation’s founding. Disagree with his views, West insists, and you’re not just a political opponent, you’re a godless Marxist. There is no symmetry here. The far left may hurl insults at the right but doesn’t scream “fascism” whenever a Republican proposes privatizing Medicare.”
But…socialism is a legitimate path for progressives. Their increased use of government control and power is right out of the socialist playbook. Socialism is progressivism. Some progressives ARE communists. Some are not. All progressives are socialist to one degree or another. If you disagree with West’s ideals, perhaps you ARE a communist. He is opposed to communism and socialism. If you agree with those ideals….you are a communist or a socialist. Notice… I said IDEALS, not his politics.
Apologists for the progressive movement always point at the reforms, which at the time…the early 20th century, were needed. But they never point at the government abuses and to the abuse of the Constitution by progressive politicians like Wilson. The belief that democracy is overrated and that the proper expert to run things for the masses is right out of the progressive book. And that is anathema to American republicanism.
They also leave off the abuses of capitalism and how capitalism had various government in its pocket. Want me to start listing private abuses?
Many people believe in balance. No name calling. These people are not apologists, communists, socialists, other labels you feel compelled to slip in.
Oh, and I’ve been called a fascist many a time because I propose privatizing social programs, among other things. Democrats and liberals have been “de-legitimizing” conservative thought for years. So, its disingenuous for Robinson, a partisan hack, to cry victim.
I didn’t hear him cry victim but I did hear you call him a hack.
Do you not think some of the conservative thought needed to be de-legitimized?
Of course not. Why should it be de-legitimized? Argued against, defeated by competing ideas, etc, but not made illegitimate. What do you think should be made illegitimate? Please explain.
I called him a hack because he completely ignores and forgives the attacks by the left that we see and hear every day, especially against Bush that called for his death, by Farrakhan that states that people will kill their leaders soon (talking about Obama in this instance) etc. I called him a hack because his article was devoid of substance and was calling for de-legitimizing ONLY ONE SIDE. He’s crying victim because he states that only the right is a danger, therefore his side is at risk.
The Gene Robinson WashPo article is great! Let me summarize for those who are busy:
“If the left does it, it’s OK…..if the right does it…..it’s Satanic”
Nothing new, really.
Whoa, lets not forget those who want to repeal the 14th amendment as it has been understood since its inception!
Stupid “buzz” words are just that, meant to reduce a complicated issue to simple sound bite mentality. Well, I reject the idea that comprehensive health care can be reduced to a sound bite. I reject the idea that government has not played an integral role in the advancement of this country in so many private industry endeavors. Is government THE answer, no, but to suggest there isn’t a “social contract” that involves government does not represent the democracy that has been a part of America since its inception.
Who wants to repeal the 14th Amendment?
I want it clarified in a court case because there are different interpretations of it from various sources, including its author.
No one used buzz words. I’m asking you what conservative thought needs to be de-legitimized? You asked me, and I said none.
If you are saying that the conservative idea of smaller government limited to Constitutional powers needs to be removed, say so. Is that what your #32 is saying?
You reject that comprehensive health care can be reduced to a sound bite. I agree. But BOTH sides are using sound bites because that’s how the media presents it. Whenever an indepth argument is presented against ACR, its ignored or rejected. Government has played a PART in the advancement of this country but its not RESPONSIBLE for its greatness. There is no argument that we don’t have a social contract. The argument is what that social contract is. The argument is about the role of government and who should be in charge.
But, arguing against conservative ideas and rejecting them is not de-legitimizing them.
De-legitimizing conservative thought means that those ideas SHOULD not be brought up, ever. So, do you think that some liberal or conservative thought needs to be de-legitimized, to be removed from discussion? That is what I see that question to be.
No one fought harder against communism than J. Edgar Hoover. COINTELpro was a war on communism yet expanded the right of the federal government.
There is just still too much obsession with communism.
You are absolutely right. There IS too much obsession with communism. No one should be supporting it and yet, they do.
Oh…you mean, confronting the ideas of socialism. Unfortunately, too many people, many of the politicians in office, believe that if they could just be allowed to implement socialism/communism THEIR way, it would work THIS time.
Of course, ol’ J Edgar wasn’t a small gov’t conservative. He, too, was a statist. He just wanted to be in charge.
look on Michelle Bachmans website.
HOW is she going to get to this grand plan? I know people who simply cannot afford healthcare. Most are independent contractors with no “employer” to subsidize their care can’t buy healthcare! That is what I mean by buzz words and blather. IMPLEMENT what it means to make health care affordable, don’t just make a statement into a void.