Search
Home  |   About  |   Q & A  |   Archives  |   Credits  |   Contact  |  
« Another Pit Bull — Another Dead Child
Barry Obama Lied About Commitment to Campaign Finance »

Karl Marx Would be Proud of Today’s Democrats

Here’s what Karl Marx has to say about “nationalizing” industry:

The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state, i.e., of the proletariat organized as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.

And here’s what the Democrats — this time it’s Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.) — have to say about nationalizing our oil industry:

If there’s any seriousness about what some of our Republican colleages are saying here in the House and elsewhere about improving the number of refineries, then maybe they’d be willing to have these refineries owned publicly, owned by the people of the United States, so that the people of the United States can determine how much of the product is refined and put out on the market. To me that sounds like a good idea.

And by “owned by the people of the united states”, he means “owned by Congress to do what WE say to do with it”.

Now tell me — how is this not the same thing?

Posted by Robbie Cooper on Thursday, June 19th, 2008 | Trackback |

3 Responses to “Karl Marx Would be Proud of Today’s Democrats”

You’re right….it’s the same thing..
Hinchey is an idiot.

Left by SB Smith on June 19th, 2008 at 1:05 pm

And from the authoritarians granting immunity to lawbreaking telecoms, a “compromise” law whose name alone tips its hat to Orwell:

“Protection of Persons Assisting the Government.” Section 802(a) provides:

[A] civil action may not lie or be maintained in a Federal or State court against any person for providing assistance to an element of the intelligence community, and shall be properly dismissed, if the Attorney General certifies to the district court of the United States in which such action is pending that . . . (4) the assistance alleged to have been provided . . . was –
(A) in connection with intelligence activity involving communications that was (i) authorized by the President during the period beginning on September 11, 2001, and ending on January 17, 2007 and (ii) designed to prevent or detect a terrorist attack, or activities in preparation of a terrorist attack, against the United States” and

(B) the subject of a written request or directive . . . indicating that the activity was (i) authorized by the President; and (ii) determined to be lawful.

[...]

So all the Attorney General has to do is recite those magic words — the President requested this eavesdropping and did it in order to save us from the Terrorists — and the minute he utters those words, the courts are required to dismiss the lawsuits against the telecoms, no matter how illegal their behavior was.

God. Bless. America.

Left by Pat on June 19th, 2008 at 4:10 pm

I agree with SB.

Of course I had never heard of Hinchey before now.

Left by Preston on June 23rd, 2008 at 6:16 pm

Got something you want to say?

Quicktags:


Notes:

You have 10 minutes after you submit your comment to edit it. Simply click the E(dit) link above the countdown-counter at the bottom of your comment. You can only edit a comment from the same IP address from where the original comment was submitted.

If your comment does not appear immediately, it has been sent to the moderation queue for approval.

Your comment either contained more than 2 hyperlinks, or it used a word(s) that are on my Spam blacklist. Comments awaiting moderation will usually be approved within a day.

And, being that it's my blog and all...I reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.