I will only one small example and dissect it to show how far from the truth it is: desperately looking for excuses for unjustifiable criticism, Sheldon labels the President’s prudent and insightful observation as “impatience with debate”.

Huh? How did you make THIS leap in illogic, Sheldon? The President was absolutely right: the longer the debate went on, the more skeptical people became. Why? Because of the many deceivers on the right poisoning the debate, filling both Congress and the media with a deluge of disinformation about all the various options. People became sick and tired of it. Thanks to that army of deceivers, it was not ‘debate’ that they grew sick and tired of: it was a cynical, heartless parody of debate.

Of course, it did not help that Kucinich on the far Left was peddling his own disinformation, but his fellow Democrats finally talked him into just enough sense to agree on the final package — which was and still is a historic achievement.

Yeah, he definitely wasn’t trying hard enough. This ties in nicely with one of the media’s favorite fairy tales–that the problem with govt is that there’s too much partisan bickering. Like if they could just get along they’d be able to solve all of our problems and we’d all live happily ever after. I guess we wouldn’t want the unwashed to get the crazy idea in their heads that maybe the politicians themselves are the problem.

The US Constitution was a nice try. After over 200 years it serves merely as window dressing while government and corporate pirates steal everything the can lay their hands on.

The constitution won’t help you. Your opponents will just cite it themselves. And then the discussion evolves into which historical white guy said what, and what they meant by it, rather than an actual debate of the topic at hand. The constitution was a very flawed document and a stupid idea.

Anyway, Obama’s foray into the nationalist arena is ugly, hateful, and probably a bad omen. I think Sheldon buried his lead.

Within the Right, socialism = statism but the socialists I talk to don’t see it that way. They regard government controls and ownership as simply a means to an end, the end being material egalitarianism. Even Marx, after all, opined that once socialism was fully achieved, the state would “wither away.”

Also within the Right, capitalism = free markets but for most people it also means the economic system as it exists in the West today. This confusion is how the progressives get away with blaming our current economic problems on “free-market fundamentalism.”

In their original coinage, “socialism” was a philosophy of leveling, which sought to destroy class barriers and establish equal distribution of wealth. And “capitalism” was a particular variant of the class system favoring a particular class of people who owned a lot of capital (factories, mines, merchant ships).

It was Marx, Engels and their followers who established the identity of “socialism” and statist means, and “capitalism” with private property and free exchange. And once they had established those associations even in the minds of their opponents, they gained an enormous advantage which they still enjoy today.

Ask us how we really feel…

Starving The Monkeys Continually And Forevermore,
John and Dagny Galt
Atlas Shrugged, Owners Manual For The Universe!(tm)

.