Posted on Dec 7, 2015
Venezuela election: Maduro's Socialists trounced - BBC News
990
5
14
0
0
0
The world is waking up to the failure of liberal policies....Venezuela votes conservative.
Socialists trounced in elections in Venezuela. Chavez turning in his grave. Venezuela is added to the list of nations voting conservative in their most recent elections including ....France, England, Germany, Argentina, and Poland. Who voted for the liberals? ....Greece. Look at the mess they are in.
Socialists trounced in elections in Venezuela. Chavez turning in his grave. Venezuela is added to the list of nations voting conservative in their most recent elections including ....France, England, Germany, Argentina, and Poland. Who voted for the liberals? ....Greece. Look at the mess they are in.
Venezuela election: Maduro's Socialists trounced - BBC News
Posted from bbc.comPosted in these groups: 
Politics
Politics
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 6
1
1
0
Liberalism is like alcoholism. Recovery can't begin until the liberal/alcoholic acknowledges they have a problem and need help. This generally happens only after they hit rock bottom. I fear that hasn't occurred among American liberals yet. A few, but still not enough...
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
People kill me with these political party lines. Both of our major parties have been complete failures overall.
It's the same crap year after year. "They broke it, we can fix it." It never gets fixed. Blame the other party.
Politicians are not held accountable for their lies and false promises instead they are re-elected smh.
It's the same crap year after year. "They broke it, we can fix it." It never gets fixed. Blame the other party.
Politicians are not held accountable for their lies and false promises instead they are re-elected smh.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SrA Art Siatkowsky - Airman; You forget that Canada just tossed out the "Conservatives" and voted the "Liberals" a majority government.
If the United States of America was suffering under an 18% unemployment rate and 100% annual inflation, WHATEVER government was in power in 2016 would likely be tossed out on its ear.
You might also want to take into account the fact that the US government has been waging a (not so) covert economic war on Argentina for years.
If the United States of America was suffering under an 18% unemployment rate and 100% annual inflation, WHATEVER government was in power in 2016 would likely be tossed out on its ear.
You might also want to take into account the fact that the US government has been waging a (not so) covert economic war on Argentina for years.
(1)
(0)
SrA Art Siatkowsky
I have never seen a Liberal lower taxes. The state of affairs in Venezuela was utter dispair. Socialist policies do not work. Creation of a welfare state does not work in most nations. Nations like Saudi Arbia with vast oil wealth can provide great welfare benefits to their population which receives approx 2,800 dollars a month from the government simply because of their vast oil wealth. But absolutely no welfare state can work with unhinged out of control illegal immigration. The more you offer for free the more people simply walk across our borders. Check on the immigration problem in nations that offer great benefits to their citizens....Denmark, Sweden, Saudi...do they have 15million illegal immigrants in their nation recieving these fantastic benefits for free like we do here?
The ACTUAL form of government our founding fathers devised was a government of free people that worked for the people by the people. Local governments determine the daily run of things and the federal government offeres a strong military and needed federal agencies like the FDA. But the ACTUAL idea of our founding fathers that still remains utterly relevant to this day and any day is the idea that people have inalienable human rights bestowed by the creator which cannot be taken away by a corrupt government like we see in America today. The idea that the government works for the people and is run by the people instead of the leftist idea that the government runs the people and knows better than the people is the core idea the founding fathers instilled in our Constitution. We have discussed and seen throughout history the result of a government that is run by arrogant leftists who believe they have a better grasp on reality than the common people and they know what is best for the people...even if it requires the murder of 100 million of them to get their ' better society ' to operate.
The ACTUAL form of government our founding fathers devised was a government of free people that worked for the people by the people. Local governments determine the daily run of things and the federal government offeres a strong military and needed federal agencies like the FDA. But the ACTUAL idea of our founding fathers that still remains utterly relevant to this day and any day is the idea that people have inalienable human rights bestowed by the creator which cannot be taken away by a corrupt government like we see in America today. The idea that the government works for the people and is run by the people instead of the leftist idea that the government runs the people and knows better than the people is the core idea the founding fathers instilled in our Constitution. We have discussed and seen throughout history the result of a government that is run by arrogant leftists who believe they have a better grasp on reality than the common people and they know what is best for the people...even if it requires the murder of 100 million of them to get their ' better society ' to operate.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SrA Art Siatkowsky - Airman; Then you haven't been paying attention to what is happening in the Democratic People's Republican Socialist Monarchy of Canada / Républicain Socialiste Monarchie Populaire Démocratique du Canada.
If America was still being governed in the way that the Founding Fathers Originally Intended then the control of the Executive Branch, the Judicial Branch, and the Senate would still be in the hands of "the right people" (namely the rich and landed gentry class). The LAST thing that the Founding Fathers wanted was for "the people" to actually run the government because "the people" simply didn't know enough to do it.
That isn't what you are taught - but that's the way the Constitution of the United States of America was written when it was ratified.
If America was still being governed in the way that the Founding Fathers Originally Intended then the control of the Executive Branch, the Judicial Branch, and the Senate would still be in the hands of "the right people" (namely the rich and landed gentry class). The LAST thing that the Founding Fathers wanted was for "the people" to actually run the government because "the people" simply didn't know enough to do it.
That isn't what you are taught - but that's the way the Constitution of the United States of America was written when it was ratified.
(0)
(0)
SrA Art Siatkowsky
True I have not been paying attention to Canada. If I can read up on it I will try, but I am certain I could find oppostion party points to counter the arguments being made that Canada socialism is anything like Venezuals or Greece (the previous Venezuela government...) but until such a time I simply do not know enough about Canada.
As for the founding fathers, their intention is always debated and the left and the right find their own answers. Their are entire majors dedicated to interpretation of Constitutional law and the motives behind the founding fathers. Would they want an uneducated country bumbkin running for president? Probally not and I dont think either party today would. Did they favor the rich and land gentry class? Well they all belonged to that class so most likely. Did they want a government that had the peoples best interest in mind? Did they not struggle with the wording of the constitution to make it blatantly clear that they wanted a government that was not tyrannical? Yes they most certainly did. The overwhelming idea behind our Constitution is that the government would be a servant of the people and not the other way around. The government would be subservient to the people, it would not infringe upon their God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Short of religion, can you think of any such effort being put into a doctrine for the benefit of humankind? Freedom of the individual is the core right the Constitution addresses. Freedom and how to form a government that will not infringe upon that freedom. How to form a government that would not attain power then become tyrannical. The constitution is very carefully thought out along those lines...how to form a government that is CONTROLLED by the people. A constitutional government that limited the power by breaking it up into 3 branches and giving authority to local governments to make local laws so long as they did not trump the overall constitutional law that was very carefully set up to protect the rights of the individual, to protect the freedoms of the individual. The founding fathers took every effort to ensure that no single entity of government would become all powerful which is why we have 3 branches with their checks and balances. Limited government is government for the people, by the people. Do the rich run for office? Do they not still today? How are the Clintons doing economically? Or Joe Biden? Obama? But do any of these people have complete power even if they become or are President? Not so long as our constitution remains the source of law for our land. So even with all of Obamas executive orders and abuses...he cant simply declare that the second amendment is no more and start taking our guns...because even today the founding fathers idea is still working. And that idea is still the best idea around for protecting the freedoms and lives of the people who live in this United States of America.
As for the founding fathers, their intention is always debated and the left and the right find their own answers. Their are entire majors dedicated to interpretation of Constitutional law and the motives behind the founding fathers. Would they want an uneducated country bumbkin running for president? Probally not and I dont think either party today would. Did they favor the rich and land gentry class? Well they all belonged to that class so most likely. Did they want a government that had the peoples best interest in mind? Did they not struggle with the wording of the constitution to make it blatantly clear that they wanted a government that was not tyrannical? Yes they most certainly did. The overwhelming idea behind our Constitution is that the government would be a servant of the people and not the other way around. The government would be subservient to the people, it would not infringe upon their God given rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Short of religion, can you think of any such effort being put into a doctrine for the benefit of humankind? Freedom of the individual is the core right the Constitution addresses. Freedom and how to form a government that will not infringe upon that freedom. How to form a government that would not attain power then become tyrannical. The constitution is very carefully thought out along those lines...how to form a government that is CONTROLLED by the people. A constitutional government that limited the power by breaking it up into 3 branches and giving authority to local governments to make local laws so long as they did not trump the overall constitutional law that was very carefully set up to protect the rights of the individual, to protect the freedoms of the individual. The founding fathers took every effort to ensure that no single entity of government would become all powerful which is why we have 3 branches with their checks and balances. Limited government is government for the people, by the people. Do the rich run for office? Do they not still today? How are the Clintons doing economically? Or Joe Biden? Obama? But do any of these people have complete power even if they become or are President? Not so long as our constitution remains the source of law for our land. So even with all of Obamas executive orders and abuses...he cant simply declare that the second amendment is no more and start taking our guns...because even today the founding fathers idea is still working. And that idea is still the best idea around for protecting the freedoms and lives of the people who live in this United States of America.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
SrA Art Siatkowsky - Airman; As an old friend of mine used to say
"You have to admire Canada just for existing. After all, the concept of a country formed by a bunch of drunks, to face a threat that didn't exist, and with absolutely no idea what they were doing or why they were doing it IS a bit absurd - and for the country to actually survive is nothing short of miraculous." and
"You cannot understand the "Canadian Psyche" unless you understand two things - [1] that trying to answer the question "What is the Canadian Identity?" is trying to define the unknown in terms of the undefined, and [2] most Canadians don't particularly care what the answer is.", and
"Canada went through World War II led by a man who got his political policy advice from a combination of (A) his dog; (B) his dead mother; and (C) a Ouija Board. As far as Canadian politicians go, he wasn't all that bad. Americans cannot understand Canada. - I have no idea why not.".
Canada's most recognized symbols are "the Maple Leaf" (an essentially disposable item), "the Beaver" (a species of rodent so dumb that it has been known to stand directly where the tree it has just cut down is going to fall), and "the Mountie" (which is rather strange for a country that isn't a police state) and it's "National Dream" was a railroad that made fortunes for the "friends of the government" (without those friends actually having to pay significant bribes).
In a world that has become absurd, living in a country that is - itself - an absurdity, knows that it is an absurdity, and really doesn't care one way or the other about it is rather relaxing.
"You have to admire Canada just for existing. After all, the concept of a country formed by a bunch of drunks, to face a threat that didn't exist, and with absolutely no idea what they were doing or why they were doing it IS a bit absurd - and for the country to actually survive is nothing short of miraculous." and
"You cannot understand the "Canadian Psyche" unless you understand two things - [1] that trying to answer the question "What is the Canadian Identity?" is trying to define the unknown in terms of the undefined, and [2] most Canadians don't particularly care what the answer is.", and
"Canada went through World War II led by a man who got his political policy advice from a combination of (A) his dog; (B) his dead mother; and (C) a Ouija Board. As far as Canadian politicians go, he wasn't all that bad. Americans cannot understand Canada. - I have no idea why not.".
Canada's most recognized symbols are "the Maple Leaf" (an essentially disposable item), "the Beaver" (a species of rodent so dumb that it has been known to stand directly where the tree it has just cut down is going to fall), and "the Mountie" (which is rather strange for a country that isn't a police state) and it's "National Dream" was a railroad that made fortunes for the "friends of the government" (without those friends actually having to pay significant bribes).
In a world that has become absurd, living in a country that is - itself - an absurdity, knows that it is an absurdity, and really doesn't care one way or the other about it is rather relaxing.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google