Are you a "Useful Idiot"? DISCUSS

[AwdGSX13]

If you forget about who wrote it and ignore the link between obama and hillary, is that something that you see today? That is what he is getting at. Is it even possible that if they do control those 8 levels that it would have some truth?

[Goat Blower]

http://i0.wp.com/1.bp.blogspot.com/-vM78NmP5aOU/T8Oc-g0tFPI/AAAAAAAALSg/C1lZOu-K5bM/s400/Obama+Face+Palm_4.jpg?resize=400%2C300

[jeremy1375]

Ok, let's call this thing here the 8 level of a 1st world country. An alternate version of the initial post.

1) Healthcare - Universal health care
2) Poverty - Unlike 3rd world countries, the majority of people do not live in poverty
3) Debt - A central bank exists where all money is created from an equal amount of debt
4) Gun Control - All first world countries have some level of gun control
5) Welfare - There is a safety net system in place to help those who are struggling.
6) Education - The highest levels of education exist here.
7) Religion - No religions should be given priority
8) Class Warfare - As has always existed in history class warfare exists. Economists are working on the best way to handle this.

I just wrote this now. Do you see my point yet?

[1ViciousGSX]

So, once again, rather than discuss the topic at hand, you'd rather deflect the discussion and insert your own?

[jeremy1375]

So rather than address the validity of the 8 levels of control, you just are willing to give them merit since they suit your beliefs?

[A//// Guy]

http://i690.photobucket.com/albums/vv261/Baretooken/lol_wut_russian_pear.jpg socialist pear says lol wut

[jeremy1375]

We should just rename the whole politics section to "Of course the liberal agenda is evil and going to destroy our country, if you think otherwise you're an idiot."

[1ViciousGSX]

Its not about what I believe, it never was. Nowhere in this thread have I stated an opinion about the validity of it. Nice try though.

[jeremy1375]

If validity is not important in the post, then what is?

[1ViciousGSX]

If validity is not important in the post, then what is?

The question of "Could there be some truth to the message?" outside of the Alinsky referrence?

Was the original poster trying to offer up something that made you think for a moment, outside of our predetermined assumptions, a view point that looking from the outside in could make those statements seems true? Or at least plausible? Or just rediculous?