Info wars is one thing, but to support your theory with a leftist rag like the NY Slimes seriously cuts into your credibility.The NY Slime can make all the excuse it wants, but the reality is, Communism always fails, always!http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3648/4576/original.jpg[/img]
hah hah well, there is some truth to that. What's sort of funny is that a few years ago, Infowars would have been the source which undercut someone's credibility. I try to review articles on a case-by-case basis before I include them in posts. To be fair, the NY Times is one of those publications that is probably 90% anti-conservative propaganda but occasionally they print a "random act of journalism" (to quote Limbaugh) that is actually factual and reasonably accurate. So in this case. I found several sources to choose from for the source material for the topic. Of those, the Times article had better content. The NYT is similar to Time magazine and other propaganda outlets for Marxists and their enablers, one must pick and choose. Infowars is a site that has become more and more a source for legitimate news as the Eightball Obama administration has gone further and further into infamy and extreme ideology. Hunter Thompson said, "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro". heh Alex Jones must have been a fan of Thompson. What once seemed like "outrageous and unthinkable" is now commonplace in the world of public events and Infowars is well-suited to that sort of coverage. For instance, only a few years ago, anyone who proposed that the president of the United States would embrace a policy of holding back billions of dollars in federal funding from states which refused to allow adult males into restrooms with minor females, would have been labeled a paranoid anti-government "kook".
And still you fail to grasp my point.The left are the only ones carrying the NY Slimes narrative of corruption being the reason for communist governments collapsing. Yes, use your theme and do a search, I'd be willing to bet all you find are leftist rags repeating this failed narrative.Truth is, ALL Commie govts thrive through corruption, it's the root of despotism.How is it you can't see the left is selling talking points first, so LIV will buy the bull shit line that Communism isn't to blame for these govts collapsing, but that individual leaders are responsible for it's failure.I'll be blunt. Learn some critical thinking skills before regurgitating leftist propaganda.Ask yourself, what's the motivation behind it, is there possibly an opposing perspective etc?
All due respect, ( and that is great) I disagree. The article admits that there is corruption, which is the root cause of the current political crisis. That is enough. People are smart. If they have enough information they will figure out the rest ( such as that radical socialism, including communism is all sophistic, hyper-intellectual BS).Most conservatives already understand that radical, revolutionary socialism is a short rail to catastrophe. Those who can be convinced to question the current leftist narrative that "radical revolutionary socialism has just not been done well enough by people who are smart enough" will see the results of applied socialist principles and QED, connect it to the reality that the narrative is false. Even though the U.S. population elected the Eightball Obama twice (at least if we can accept that the election system is not already hopelessly compromised, which I am not) I think there is a lot of evidence that on the whole the average non-leftist is fairly bright. One of the biggest problems in our current situation is that the information that people access is either false, misleading or incomplete because of the socialist (mis) education system. Sure we don't back off denigrating radical socialism (especially communism, which is radical revolutionary Statist socialism forced on a population at the point of a gun) but we also try to educate people by allowing people like the NY Times to make admissions like these (even though they hope that people will buy into their narrative) about how obscenely corrupt leftists are. Concerning the other criticisms of your post, (my "lack of critical thinking skills, etc.) I find that I must post either a great deal or nothing at all. I elect the latter.
You are one seriously obtuse individual.I challenge you to find the word Communist or any bvariation thereof in your link.http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/14/world/americas/cristina-fernandez-kirchner-indicted.html?_r=1
hah hah Perhaps I am obtuse, but if so, it is not revealed by my post. Communism is an ambiguous term both historically and within the context of the plethora interpretations of the "post-modern" popular lexicon (the mass media alters the meaning of terms capriciously). What does communism mean to you !?! And why does its deletion from the article make the entire substance irrelevant or inaccurate? Of course, you are free to insult me further sieur, but that tends to end discussions, so I generally avoid insulting friends and allies since I am generally interested in their thoughts, feelings and opinions.
Yes, that statement confirmed my earlier suspicions that you're obtuse, but then you proceed to obfuscate with some strawman over individual interpretation of Marxism, which makes one question your affinity for leftist drivel.Again, go through that BS you posted and show me one reference to the left.I bet you don't even see the parallel here with our own leftist govt. Yeah, that's one of the issues NY Slimes is working hard in it's avoidance to connecting the dots of communism and Dim party policy.
It just seems to me that to throw out the entire article about corruption of leftists, simply because they are not mentioned as such, is forsaking the good in pursuit of the perfect. That this is being reported at all shows how dramatically desperate the far left is becoming - because things are so bad and getting worse, that they HAVE to report it. That is encouraging to me and IMO worth sharing. You are certainly entitled to your opinions on my intellect, character or allegiance, but you can't reasonably think that I will agree.