New York Russians Are Creeped Out By Democrats
Written by Mockarena // January 17, 2011 // Socialism Sucks // 37 Comments
And who can blame them, really?
According to this, there’s a whole bunch of Russian immigrants on Staten Island who are aligning with the GOP, because the direction that Democrats are taking the country is too “socialistic,” and it reminds them too much of precisely the kind of political landscape they came to the US to escape.
One such Russian immigrant, who has been a businessman in the US for a couple of decades now, said that Democrats’ policies are “too socialistic. It’s very painful for us to see.”
I don’t know about you all, but I kinda feel like he oughta know.
Another immigrant who came to the US in 1994 said, “Government is affecting small business more and more. It’s the same as what’s happening in Russia.”
Naturally, Democrats were quick to deny this. State Senator Diane Savino said, “You can’t ignore the fact that the Russian population here came of age during the Soviet era. They have different thoughts on what communism and socialism mean. They are a little more sensitive to it. But, that being said, you can’t compare the policies of the Democratic Party with communism. It’s absurd.”
Well, apparently it’s not, Diane. And the very people who “came of age” during the Soviet era are the ones recognizing the similarities. They probably have a better frame of reference than you do.
All you really need to do is see what the Communist Party of the USA’s “Take Action” items are. It’s basically Obama’s wishlist.
37 Comments on "New York Russians Are Creeped Out By Democrats"
If he walks and talks like some tyrant, he just may use the identity of ‘Democrat’ but he isn’t one.
Communist Party of the USA?? I didn’t even think it existed anymore! I just figured it had assimilated itself within the Democratic Party. After all, the Democrats give the Communists in this country everything they want, although not necessarily all at once! But they sure are trying!
And I watched Dr. Zhivago over the weekend. And it scared the crap out of me.
Who would have to speak out with this point to be heard and believed?
Or is it just more and more of the same? The only truth is their truth.
“All you really need to do is see what the Communist Party of the USA’s “Take Action” items are. It’s basically Obama’s wishlist.”
OR….you can just compare him to moderate Republicans from past decades. It’d probably be a more accurate depiction.
And the point of that would be….?????
This creeps me out:
Report: EU School Calendars Scrub Christian Holidays, Keep Muslim Ones
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/report-eu-school-calendars-scrub-christian-holidays-keep-muslim-ones/
I dear friend of mine recently earned her citizenship. She is an emigre from Russia by way of Georgia. She was probably as excited to become a citizen as she was to become a mother. It was, perhaps, the most chilling (political) moment of my adult life when she commented that as proud as she is to be a US citizen, she sees so many things happening here that her parents and she recalled seeing in the Soviet Union.
Hey New York Russians, the Democrat Party kind of creeps out Flyover Americans too!
Having grown up under a regime quite similar to the Soviet one, it seems to me that Obama’s wish list, such as it is, is not the issue; the issue is always the revolution, the fundamental transformation of the United States. He and his ilk in the Democratic Party take their cues from Saul Alinsky (Rules for Radicals – worth reading as a cautionary tale), and will use subterfuge, deceit and dishonesty to achieve their goal. The conservatives are at a disadvantage because by and large they adhere to an ethical code of conduct – they generally follow the letter and the spirit of the law; for the followers of Alinsky, the end – the so called social justice – justifies any and all means. Essentially, the Left is a religious movement, promising and working for a Paradise, the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, never mind that every attempt to bring it about resulted in uncounted millions of victims. This is the radical hubris: “We can create a new world. Through our political power we can make a new race of men and women who will live in harmony and peace and according to the principles of social justice. We can be as gods.” Who will see to it that “social justice“ is done remains unspecified.
My reaction to the “fundamental transformation of the Unites States” is neatly summarized in the quote from Mark Twain’s much recently maligned novel, Huckleberry Finn. Jim, the main character of the novel, is asked to return to the care of Aunt Sally who would “adopt and sivilize” him. He responds: “And I can’t stand it. I been there before.”
Given the kind of talk out of the left recently it looks like they want their version of the Russian Revoution as well
genetics73: Best. Response. Ever.
I’d love it if some of those legal Russian immigrants would really get their stories out into the mainstream.
OMG…is Ace Bailey back?
BRAVO GENETICS!
“But, that being said, you can’t compare the policies of the Democratic Party with communism. It’s absurd.””
Yes I can compare and I will. Democrats want more and more government control over every aspect of our lives, and soon it will be total government control. That is communist. Perhaps the nit wits can’t see the road they are heading down because they have no clue what socialism and communism is. For years the education system has taught, and still teaches, that socialism and communism are on the right end of the political spectrum which is totally false.
And to those that think The Communist Party USA didn’t exist any longer, think again! So does the Socialist Party, and both align with the Democrats. The Communist Party even said the Democrats share their values!!!
Ace can you possibly have a post where you don’t justify bad behavior with more bad behavior?
A correction to my earlier post is in order: of course, it was Huck, not Jim, who was offered to return to Aunt Sally. My mistake, the first one I have ever made.
Laurel, no he can’t.
I had really been looking forward to Ace’s return, but it’s just boring.
Laurel, that was not my intent. However, it’s very telling that you equate moderate Republican policy positions with “bad behavior”. It’s says a lot about the GOP’s hard right turn.
Ace: Hard right turn? Maybe it is time for a hard right turn because it was severe moderation that incrementally got us where we are today.
And once again we have yet another liberal implying compromise but that certainly wasn’t the mantra when Dems were a solid majority.
Furthermore, I submit that in order to have a good compromise one must know where their line in sand is.
Compromise for the sake of compromise is no virtue.
Perfect example of the Ace approach to argument.
Laurel asks:
“Ace can you possibly have a post where you don’t justify bad behavior with more bad behavior?”
The easy win is to go back, find a post that does not fit the pattern (if one exists), post it and move on. Instead, Ace chooses to start a whole NEW argument about another subject.
I wasn’t starting a whole new argument at all. I was responding to Laurel’s comments. What’s your deal, anyway?
I have no deal. I’m just pointing out that it would have been very easy for you to settle that point, but you chose not to. I’m a little curious why, but I’m not that interested.
Are you implying I have made comments unrelated to the topic? I don’t believe so. Perhaps you just misunderstood. Maybe if you tell me which comment confused you, I can explain it for you.
Ace: OMG! You really don’t know what MD is talking about? Really?!
I think that the major difference is that the communists in Russia stole the power in Russia – and now, if we’re not careful, we’re just going to hand it over.
And there it is.
As I said in a prior post, Ace, boring.
Laurel,
Ace totally understands my point and realizes that I’m right. Thus, Ace is done. This is how arguments with Ace end. They stop when Ace is in a corner.
As I have said, if you are implying I have made comments unrelated to the topic I don’t believe that is the case. If you are implying something else, why do you just say so?
Ok, I can only surmise (since you refuse to say) that this is the comment that confuses you md (“a post that does not fit the pattern”):
“All you really need to do is see what the Communist Party of the USA’s “Take Action” items are. It’s basically Obama’s wishlist.”
OR….you can just compare him to moderate Republicans from past decades. It’d probably be a more accurate depiction.”
You see md, what I was implying here is that Obama is much closer (policy-wise) to moderate Republicans before they were banished than to communists.
Someone with the mind of a 5-year-old could have not only deciphered my “cryptic” puzzle, but also would have recognized the relevance and irony of this comment as it relates to the original post. Sure enough, Laurel not only “got” the point but commented on it (accused moderate Republicans of “bad behavior”) and we had a little back & forth.
I’m so sorry if your lack of comprehension left you feeling “left out”. I’ll try real hard to S-P-E-L-L things out for you in the future.
Geez Ace, what took you so long to get round to “You see md, what I was implying here is that Obama is much closer (policy-wise) to moderate Republicans before they were banished than to communists” Now, that would be a position to argue from, rather than all the obsfuscation you usually resort to, which is why everyone wearies of your posts.
You may even be onto something here. After all, Theodore Roosevelt was the practicing midwife at the birth of the progressive movement and another paragon of conservatism (not) William H. Taft provided oversight for the 16th Amendment, thus securing Marx’s first maxim of a progressive income tax. Truth be told the Republican’s Socialist Train pulled out of the station right behind the Democrat’s and that is one of the reasons the Chicks are seeking a “makeover” of conservatism. We are sorely dis-served by both national political parties.
The Indianapolis Tea Parts has featured several speakers at our Tax day events who were escapees of oppressive socialist regimes, including the Georgia that is over there, England and California.
Let’s try again.
“Perfect example of the Ace approach to argument.
Laurel asks:
‘Ace can you possibly have a post where you don’t justify bad behavior with more bad behavior?’
The easy win is to go back, find a post that does not fit the pattern (if one exists), post it and move on. Instead, Ace chooses to start a whole NEW argument about another subject.”
My point is, all you had to do to prove Laurel wrong was to copy and paste a prior post that didn’t justify bad behavior with more bad behavior. It would have been easy. VERY easy.
But you didn’t. You replied with this: “Laurel, that was not my intent. However, it’s very telling that you equate moderate Republican policy positions with “bad behavior”. It’s says a lot about the GOP’s hard right turn.”
Thus shifting the already sideways argument in another direction.
Arguing with you is like herding cats.
“all you had to do to prove Laurel wrong was to copy and paste a prior post that didn’t justify bad behavior with more bad behavior”
Seriously? You thought I should have done that?
Md, Laurel addressed my point (that Obama is closer to moderate Republicans than communists) almost exactly as I had intended it. Therefore my response to her was completely in context. It wasn’t a shift in the argument at all.
Maybe you should blog with a partner next time. Having someone there to explain these things to you would make life easier for the rest of us.
I’ll take it under advisement.
But feel free to consider my point. Even if you don’t think it applies here. You may be surprised how often it does.
WELL SAID PAPA KILO!
Ace: The fact that I addressed your point doesn’t negate the fact that you shifted the argument or the topic. Just as it really doesn’t change the fact that you are justifying previous bad behavior by equating Obama with obsolete big government Republicans. You also presume that every single person on here readily agrees with someone just because they label oneself a Republican. You presume too much.
The inconsistency actually lies with you in justifying bad behavior and the big government Republicans. Obama actually has been consistent, consistently growing government, as well as conservatives saying no more expansion of government. So let me reiterate once again…compromise for the sake of compromise is no virtue. Compromise over decades is what got us to this point. Ace, if you gain 20 lbs you stop and go on a diet, but if you gain 500 lbs you are a hair’s breath away from life support. This government is on life support. Someone needs to cut the food supply here.
I gotta ask…Do you always justify your own shortcomings by pointing to the shortcomings of others?
MD you rock.
“The inconsistency actually lies with you in justifying bad behavior and the big government Republicans”
Comparing President Obama with moderate Republicans is not “justifying bad behavior”. It’s an attempt to point out how far right the GOP has turned. Intent matters. It should also point out how silly the Obama=communist argument is. If the comparison of Obama to moderate Republicans is apt, then the logical conclusion would be moderate Republicans=communists. And who among conservatives is saying this??