I beg to differ. The right to bear arms wasn't even in the Constitution when it was made. It was the second amendment. Freedom of speech came first, mate. I don't think those soldiers in the revolution were fighting for the right to bear arms because see, at that time, they already had the right to bear arms. If people think this country is based on the right to bear arms, the United States truly has no chance in this world.

You're saying that like that right allows anyone to have guns. People need to get licenses and have to get through all these things to get it.

The point is that this country was not founded upon and is not based upon the right to bear arms.

You sure have a grim view on American values. Guns. Additionally, socialistic countries are the happiest in the world. Denmark is the #1 happiest country in the world, with a closely regulated economy. It's really a wonderful place. They actually use bikes and have roads specifically for biking throughout the capital (Copenhagen? Or's that Sweden?). I don't particularly care what a country was based off of. I care about what's the best way for a country to preserve happiness for its citizens. Although, all this 'Americans r hurtin'' crap really has to stop. You damn retards screwed up the world economy, stop the freaking whining.

Alfa's also right about it being the second amendment. It's a really strange amendment, in my opinion, but the country was in no way based off of it. As for the licenses, that alone denies some people the guns and so the license requirement is unconstitutional. I think whoever wrote the 2nd amendment was high.

Socialism fails extremely. Look at Canada, people are unhappy about taxes. This brings the "free healthcare" into play. Healthcare will never be free and our taxes will increase, even though Obama claims to cut our taxes. Distribution of wealth isn't fair to those who worked hard in school to get there or worked hard anywhere. I know a friend who has a friend in a NHL. He makes about 500k a year but from taxes and all these other things, he ends up with only 90k. And the 1st 10 amendments are from the Declaration of Independence, what America was based on.

You're just uninformed, and make no attempt to become informed. Obama is not promising free healthcare, he's allowing people to buy into government healthcare. This means premiums will go down, because more people will be buying in. It doesn't involve a tax increase. People will still pay for health care, they'll simply pay less.


Who cares? That happens to everyone who works? And most income taxes come from the state, not the federal government. I'm sure he's crying because he has "only" 90,000 dollars, while thousands of others lose their homes and are tossed out on the streets without being helped, and hundreds of thousands lose their jobs due to mismanagement of companies by people who make 500,000 dollars a year.


Right to bear arms was the second amendment, not the first. Freedom of speech is far more important, and was far more important to the founding fathers.


If Canada is socialist, then Europe is communist and we're fascist. Barack Obama will not raise our taxes. You assume he will raise taxes because you assume he is a liar.

No, I was just saying how he had to pay like 50% for Canadian taxes.

It is still part of the Declaration of Independence. Let's not forget what America stood for, FREEDOM.




You need to learn the difference. Fascist = Far Right, Socialist = Far Left. Europe and Canada are currently near the Left.

Hence why I referred to Europe and Canada as socialist, because you implied they were. Compared to them we are far right, hence why I said fascist. Congratulations for not reading my post.


Liberty.


If he's Canadian, I don't care, and why would you even mention that? Obama isn't going to raise taxes, McCain isn't going to raise taxes, and we don't live in Canada.

]
I overread it. Thanks for the grats anyways.
One of few which America stands for.

Oh nice one here. I was comparing America with Canada and showing an example of what Obama's plans can be like. Even the guy who came up with this health plan of Canada doesn't like it now and sees the fault of it.

Except Obama's plan doesn't involve higher taxes. That's the big difference.

Echo, maybe you missed it: The happiest country on earth is socialist. I don't care what stupid system they have in Canada, they're doing it wrong. The happiest country, Denmark, is socialist. And, having been to both Denmark and Canada, I should say that the lifestyles are completely different. Canada's doing it wrong.

Actually we could've gotten that anyway from the way that the only difference between the US and Canada was climate and how weak, compared to the US, Canada is today. Stop talking about Canada. It's irrelevant. Obama isn't proposing free health care.

So you're admitting that Obama is socialist? Even though he claims that he isn't?

Thanks, that was what I was trying to get out.
I rest my case.

feds caught 2 guys (supermacists) planning to assassinate a bunch of black polititans, ending with Barack Obama.
IDK if thats off topic atm or not, but its true

Quit twisting our words. You implied socialist counties are inferior, and he proved that they aren't. In no way did he say Obama is socialist. It's pretty simple if you have basic reading comprehension. You know he wasn't saying Obama is a socialist.

Then saying that Denmark was socialist is irrelevant.

Let's not forget, Denmark is a small country.

Who caused the current mortgage and credit crisis? Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did by buying risky loans. Since the banks knew that Fannie and Freddie would buy risky loans up from them, they kept giving out risky loans. Eventually the bubble crashed, and we have our current situation. Who are Fannie and Freddie? Oh, they're federal entities masquerading as private companies. If anything, government intervention caused the problem. It isn't the solution, despite socialist beliefs. It's a lie to say America is a laissez-faire economy.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were allowed to buy risky loans because regulations that would have prevented this were broken down. And the Republican chant has always been "deregulation!" and it really has not helped.

The economy will fix itself, but we need to put in regulations to ensure it can't happen again, and we need to create income sources for the unemployed so that they can spend money.

That's right, Republicans do chant deregulate. If government had just stopped trying to get the market to do what it wanted to do in the first place with Fannie and Freddie, this would have happened. And Bush (surprisingly) warned that the two were becoming too powerful. The Democrats refused to do anything about it because Freddie and Fannie were their agents of "affordable housing for everyone". McCain even sponsored a bill that would've regulated the two in 2005. Obama voted against it. The democrats took a party line against it, and with a few republicans support, it wasn't passed.

Doesn't seem to stop these from happening.

Americans are stupid. Thus, someone going around as a socialist couldn't win an election. Obama isn't socialist, but he's more socialist than McCain. I'm sorry, but I thought you were trying to convince someone that Obama isn't perfect. I agree. He isn't. Needs moar socialism. And, I wasn't claiming that Obama is socialist. You were. I simply showed how even if he is, that's a good thing.
The happiest country is socialist.
The capitalistic countries are going through economic breakdowns. (Unlike Iceland, Bulgaria and Ukraine, Denmark's phine). And you're saying socialism is bad. Well, whatever you'd like to think. How size matters, I'll never know. Bigger country, bigger government. No other change.
How the fact that they're partially government-owned is relevant, I'll never know. Government intervention comes in many forms, either way. Just because one way is bad, doesn't mean they all are.

Look at Denmark. They have a population of 5.5 million people, the happiest, and yearly defense budget of 3.903 billion USD. If you keep that people/defense budget ratio, at the US's population, 300 million, the defense budget would be $212 billion USD. No, it's not as good as the US's 700 billion.. but the US hasn't really been invaded in 200 years, there hasn't been a World War in the Americas, and the US has far more natural resources than Denmark. Plus, the US got a big economic boom during WWII due to increased demand - at the end of WWII, Denmark wasn't in nearly as great relative shape as the US was. Stop whining about Pearl Harbor already (@thosewhocelebratePearlHarbordayorwhateveryoucallit).

Now, tell me... How has a semi-socialism failed this country?