≡ Menu

The Tea Party aren’t the only ones comparing Obama to Hitler

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • SJ July 15, 2010, 8:32 PM

    Nazi = socialist + hating jews.

    Obama = socialist + hating jews.

    • A. Nuran July 16, 2010, 11:01 PM

      SJ, you really are brimming over with your own end product.

      The Nazis were no more Socialists than Pyongyang is the Democratic Republic of Korea. The Nazis were classic, textbook Fascists. And if you don’t understand the difference between the two you really need to stop flapping your bacon-hole long enough to learn the difference.

      And as I’ve pointed out in painful detail elsewhere (reply currently in the spam filter) Obama is largely to the right of Nixon and is comparable to Bush I and Bush II in his substantive policies. If that’s Socialism I’m Queen Beatrix of Holland.

      • SJ July 18, 2010, 8:31 PM

        NAZI = Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei = National Socialist German Workers’ Party

        Also, When a regime is far enough out there to the left and to the right, it is equally totalitarian.

        Obama has been theeeee most liberal senator and he’s the most leftist president with his anti-business attitude, socializing banks and car companies, and sucking up to the Islamic world while throwing Israel under a bus.

        A. Nuran you are just a bootleg Keith Olbermann.

  • Yechiel July 15, 2010, 8:36 PM

    Am I the only one who thinks that Obama is one the best presidents we have had in recent history?

    • Leftie July 15, 2010, 8:41 PM

      On this site, one of the few.

      In the real world, no.

    • A. Nuran July 16, 2010, 2:10 AM

      By any objective measure the last liberal in the White House was Richard Nixon. Since then we’ve had a series of globalizing, plutocrat worshipping, oligarch enabling destroyers of our industrial base and the middle class.

      Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II were disasters by any objective standard. The supposed “liberal” of the bunch, Clinton, had economic policies that were firmly in the camp of moderately conservative Republicans of the 1960s and 1970s.

      Obama shines by comparison because he’s simply not as bad. But in the end he refuses to fight the worst Republican policies and supports the bankster-enriching, middle-class destroying policies of his four predecessors.

  • Runforfun54 July 15, 2010, 8:51 PM

    OMG .. you are SOOO not alone. I thought I was the only one!

  • the other shim July 15, 2010, 9:25 PM

    Are you people insane? The guy is a blatant anti-Israel piece of sh*t! And not only that he alienates allies like Poland and India. I wouldn’t call him Hitler but he’s definitely a Communist. Geez you people need to follow the news better. Here’s a site you guys should at least look at: frontpagemag.com, David Horowitz will enlighten you.
    I prefer Bill Clinton. He may have engineered Oslo but at least his intentions were good. Can you imagine Obama whispering “shalom Chaver” if Netanyahu was assasinated? The guy thinks Yerushalayim is a settlement!!!

    Ok, I need to calm down now.

    • Anonymous July 15, 2010, 11:15 PM

      Whats a Communist?

      • Stan July 16, 2010, 10:19 AM

        according to the other shim, somebody who doesnt like Israel. who knew?

    • A. Nuran July 16, 2010, 10:39 PM

      ToS, please stop before you embarrass yourself any furthers. As God is my witness I am completely serious here. It’s obvious that you have no idea what the word “Communist” means. The words coming out of your mouth make you sound painfully ignorant.

      Broadly stated, a Communist believes that all income-producing property and other means of economic production should be in the hands of the people. There would be no social classes, and ultimately no State. Further, Communism holds that the only way to bring this about is through revolution since incremental change will always be stopped or co-opted by the powerful.

      This describes President Obama about as well as “Secular Muslim” describes Meir Kahane. He continues the Bush policy of bailing out the big banks and brokers.

      Obama’s policy initiatives have all been incremental. The Economic Stimulus bill, the Health Care Reform Act, the recent banking reform and even the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell have all started to the right of the economic policies of a Johnson, Nixon or Ford. Then a good half of what went into the final bills in each case was input (read demands) from the far right wing of the Republicans.

      His Administration has filed quite a number of briefs in Supreme Court cases supporting expansion of property rights. He supports the ACTA treaty and a radical, draconian reinterpretation of intellectual property. He has opposed the re-institution of the Glass-Steagall Act and drew the wrath of the Liberal wing of the Democratic Party by protecting the profits of Pharma, the Insurance industry and the Too Big to Fail banks. His economic team is made up almost entirely of Goldman-Sachs and retreaded Clinton-era “free market” neo-cons.

      He has continued funding for the Bush-era Office of Faith Based Initiatives, a scam for funneling taxpayer money into the churches. This is utterly opposed to Communism’s atheistic principles.

      That is not what a Communist, a Socialist or even a middle-of-the road Democrat of thirty years ago would have done.

      You don’t know what the hell you are talking about. It really is that simple.

      • Tova July 18, 2010, 2:49 AM

        Why is it that anyone who disagrees with A. Nuran doesn’t know “what the hell” they’re talking about?

        • A. Nuran July 18, 2010, 9:47 AM

          When it comes to things that are utterly outside the bounds of reality it’s the simple truth. It doesn’t matter how much Hayek or Ayn Rand you gobble. Obama isn’t a Communist. He isn’t even vaguely a Socialist.

          If you really are studying economics at a “major East Coast University” like you claim you’d have to agree with that statement. You’d have at least learned the definition of Marxism.

        • A. Nuran July 18, 2010, 10:04 AM

          OK then, Tova. Since you’re an economics student at a “major East Coast University” as you always take pains to tell us…

          What are the textbook definitions of Communism and Marxist economics?

          How many Communists or Marxist economists are on the CoEE or have cabinet-level positions?

          Compare the economic policies of the current Administration to classic Communist ones.

          That is why the statement “Obama is a Communist” is nonsense.

          • Tova July 18, 2010, 1:34 PM

            “Since you’re an economics student at a “major East Coast University” as you always take pains to tell us…”

            I’ve actually never said such a thing. I’ve also never referred to the Obama Administration as communistic, so I’m not sure how answering these questions (which you already have the answers to) is going to be a productive use of my time.

            I’m not sure why you insist on blasting your opponents so, especially when you often characterize them as having viewpoints which they don’t really claim.

      • the other shim July 18, 2010, 10:44 PM

        Forget labels for a minute. You know a man by the company he keeps and I think if you spent a few minutes looking this over you would understand where us anti-Obama people are coming from.


  • FrumGer July 15, 2010, 10:14 PM

    Obama Is nothing more than a poster boy, he is the greatest nothing on earth right now. he has done literally nothing at all for a over a year. and will continue to do what most figure head position holders do, get extremely rich at doing nothing… Do you think steve jobs really invents any of the apple shit? no he just sit there in his $10,000 dollar desk and grows his beard for the next big Apple unveiling.. they are there for no other reason but because some one needs to here all the shit from a charismatic person…

    Btw he is not a socialist either. universal healthcare is no more socialist than the Police dept, the Fire Dept, or the Dept of highway safety (our public road systems)

    safety and well being is a right, and we are the only progressive nation with a caveman version of Healthcare. And the bill they passed isnt even universal healthcare either..

    But dude is straight anti Israel and for that I cant stand him.

  • Heshy Fried July 16, 2010, 1:17 AM

    Jeez no one found the video as funny as I did?

    • Phil July 16, 2010, 12:13 PM

      I liked it.

      • FrumGer July 16, 2010, 12:48 PM

        The Video IS very funny….. Its a good meat and bones satire on the vast majority of right wing America… But for a true Solcialist he should have picked Jesus…..

  • Yechiel July 16, 2010, 10:10 AM

    We must remember that the president’s job is the protection of the United States not to be nice to Israel. I have trouble understanding why some many zionists prefer to live outside of Israel.

    • John July 16, 2010, 10:28 AM

      Great news! Im here to help you understand. Here are a couple of reasons:
      Their families live outside of Israel.
      They have little kids, its not so easy to just get up and leave.
      They are settled with a job etc, outside of israel
      Relocating to Israel, may make their degree or whatevr worthless forcing them to start from scratch.
      Israel is a lot more polarized between charedi vs. mizrachi, most people I know (think brooklyn) dont fit in comfortably with either camp.
      There are doezns of others, Im sure you can think of plenty more.

      • Anonymous July 16, 2010, 11:49 AM

        Nonsense. People with children and good jobs in the US and Canada make Aliyah all the time. The reason that most Jews live in N. America is because life is better here. It is safer, less stressful, with more opportunity and a higher standard of living.

        If you love Israel so much, move there. Risk your life or the lives of children to defend the state you cherish so dearly. Spend your money there; pay those high taxes to the Israeli coffers. Until then, your just making excuses in order to justify your behavior.

        • John July 16, 2010, 1:56 PM

          thanks for listing more reasons, there are hundreds.
          Of course not all the reasons I gave apply to all people, and of course in spite of all the reasons we can possibly think of, people make aliyah.
          You havent really added anything

          • Schwartzie July 18, 2010, 4:16 AM

            I hate you spoiled rotten kikes. If you’re not going to move to Israel because *it’s hard* then at least shut the hell up about Obama. Geez.

            • the other shim July 18, 2010, 4:56 AM

              So you can’t support Israel unless you live there, right?

            • John July 18, 2010, 10:23 AM

              Congrats Schwartzie you win the first place prize in non-sequitorhood. Have you thought your comment through at all?. according to you only people who move to Israel can criticise Obama, whats one got to do with the other?

    • the other shim July 16, 2010, 11:17 AM

      If you honestly think Israel’s security has nothing to do with the US you need to crawl out of the cave you’ve been hiding in. The same people that will kill Israeli children will gladly kill yours despite your views. I’ve tried telling this to my idiot Neturai Karta brother in law as well.

      • A. Nuran July 16, 2010, 10:50 PM

        The US and Israel share a number of important security and political concerns. That is why there is so much cooperation. And that’s why to this day the US gives an awful of money to Israel and vetoes any talk of international sanctions or even unequivocal UN resolutions condemning Israel.

        But any American government which puts the interests of another country ahead of its own is serving as an agent of a foreign power. To do so would be a violation of the Oath of Office and would be cause for criminal charges.

        So the US and Israel are allies. Obama is more supportive of Israel than Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and arguably Reagan, Clinton and Bush I (who served the interests of his Saudi Oil Masters wholeheartedly).

        If he were “virulently” anti-Israel as some here suggest he would have led the charge to condemn Israel for the flotilla debacle. He would have frozen all economic aid to Jerusalem contingent on removing all the settlements in Judea and Samaria. He would have cut off all military assistance, given diplomatic recognition to Hamas or Fatah as nations, called in the loans and expelled the Israeli ambassador.

        Most of all, he would have said “All the Salafists want is for us to stop supporting a country which is killing Muslims. We can live with that deal. As of now we’re cutting off all ties with the State of Israel.” You’ll notice that hasn’t happened.

        • the other shim July 18, 2010, 4:52 AM

          Obama can’t completely turn on Israel (in public, anyway) because lots of his supporters are Jews. It’s called diplomacy. Can’t totally alienate George Soros. And he has opened diplomatic relations with Hamas. Here’s a linky from leftist news org. the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/08/barack-obama-gaza-hamas

          • A. Nuran July 18, 2010, 3:34 PM

            So the facts are against you, but that doesn’t matter because you’re sure the secret facts that you don’t have support you.

            Nice one, there.

            • the other shim July 18, 2010, 8:13 PM

              You might get more respect on these boards if you didn’t belittle everyone who doesn’t agree with you.

        • JT July 18, 2010, 11:18 AM

          (This site needs a ‘like’ button for comments…nicely done, sir)

  • Yechiel July 16, 2010, 12:40 PM

    Why have I always been taught that the future of the Jewish people and Israel is dependent upon our relationship with G-d rather than an alliance with a foreign power? Have the laws changed since our contract which states that we will be protected as long as we obey the laws given to us?

    • the other shim July 16, 2010, 6:02 PM

      You don’t get it. If the president hates Israel he’s going to hate the Jooos as well. That means you. That has implications for ALL of us. Did you know that a member of his cabinet has said that if Israel attacks Iran the US should down the Israeli planes attacking Iran?

      What happens in Israel can happen here. It isn’t about depending on a foreign power. An enlightening video from David Horowitz: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fSvyv0urTE&feature=player_embedded

      In it a USCD student endorses a second Holocaust.

      • Bob July 18, 2010, 10:15 AM

        You are embarassing yourself. did you know that several members of his cabinet are jewish? and that he nominated a jew to the supreme court. I dont like him either, but saying he hates all “joos” (is that a joke? I dont get it) make you sound stupid

    • A. Nuran July 16, 2010, 10:56 PM

      Well, you’ve been taught wrong. Muttering incantations in Hebrew and the bureaucratic language of the Ancient Persian Empire did not preserve Israel in 1967 or 1973. It was men bearing arms supplied by foreign powers. Nixon was the one who supplied arms and money at the critical juncture.

      The money that pays for the “learners” to squat in their madrassas, sorry yeshivot, and endlessly memorize commentaries on commentaries on scriptures comes largely from the United States of America. Part of it is sentiment and a certain affection between the countries. Part of it is tireless lobbying by American Jews, most of whom are not up to your standards of yiddishkeit. Part of it is the US’s cynical perception of its best interests.

      • Anonymous July 17, 2010, 10:37 PM

        > ” endlessly memorize commentaries on commentaries on scriptures ”
        You have absolutely no idea of what takes place in yeshivos. hate frum people all you like, youre not the first It must really bug you knowing that weve survived this long and will outlive you as well. cmon, get your facts straight so your hate laced diatribes make some sense

      • Phil July 17, 2010, 10:49 PM


        Anyone that thinks that the 6 day war and Yom Kippur victories were anything short of miracles is either blind, full of doodoo, or both.

        Watch this clip to give you some insight:

      • the other shim July 18, 2010, 5:10 AM

        A Nuran

        You think because I don’t like Obama that makes me some haredi fanatic? Rational people don’t like him either. “Up to your standards of yiddishkeit”? Jesus! Have you read any of my posts? Do I honestly come off as frummer than thou?

        I support Israel and am actually against the Israeli government supporting the kollel system there. Get your rich in-laws to support you or get a job. People who are chareidi don’t like Israel, remember? They always say, you support Israel? Haven’t you read Perfidy?

      • JT July 18, 2010, 11:20 AM

        Madrassa = ???? (as in ??? ????)
        And while we’re playing this game, Hajj = ??

        • JT July 18, 2010, 11:21 AM

          Looks like Hebrew won’t cut it…

          Madrassa = Midrash (as in Beit Midrash)
          And, Hajj = Chag

          • ghottistyx July 18, 2010, 10:21 PM

            Yes, there’s lot’s of Arabic words that are similar to Hebrew words. Both are Semitic languages.

            Habibi=need I say more?

            I could go on…

            • the other shim July 18, 2010, 11:01 PM

              2 others that I can think of are zina=znut and tahaara=tahara. Oh and umma=am (as in am yisrael).

              (thank you asktheimam)

      • the other shim July 18, 2010, 8:31 PM

        You both are quite naive. Because he has what to do with Jews doesn’t make him anti-Israel and anti-Semitic? You’ve never heard of the term “useful idiot”? Because the Palestinians don’t have anything to do with Neturai Karta who are Jews and the ISM isn’t headed by Jews (Adam Shapiro ring a bell?), and Noam Chomsky and Norman Finkelstein aren’t Holocaust deniers/minimizers?
        Does that mean Hamas and Fatah, because they associate with these people don’t want to kill Jews?

        Calling people idiots on these boards does nothing to further your arguments and only serves to make you look immature despite the fact that you’re real informed.

        • Bob July 18, 2010, 9:31 PM

          No the other shim, it is you who are naive. The comparison to hamas is ludicrous at best. Hamas killed Jews and still tries on a day to day basis, the fact that they associate with other anti-semites although they may be jewish like neturei karta obviously doesnt mitigate the fact that they kill jews.
          Obama hasnt killed any Jews (as far as im aware of, I dont know much about his kenyan days, perhaps you do), the fact that he associates with Jews who dont hate other jews and who wear their judaism on their sleeve (Emanuel recently traveled to Israel for his son’s bar mitzva), makes your theory of his secret jew-hatred hard to follow, and your comparison to hams absurd
          Would you please be so kind as to explain why an anti-semite would host a seder? have jewish chief of staff? nominate a jew to the supreme court? where is he going with this? Thanks
          Of course if it is just secret hatred with no end-game. well whats the harm?

          • the other shim July 18, 2010, 10:58 PM

            Because most Jews including yourself support him blindly and he can’t completely alienate them as I’ve said before. He knows who butters his bread. He can’t be an idiot. I don’t know what his final plan is, but he is not on our side. Nor is he on the side of America for that matter. The Jews he associates with are liberals first, Jews last.

            It would take too long to prove just how bad for the world and America Obama is but there are plenty of blogs and websites you can go to that will prove my point more eloquently than me. Again, frontpagemag.com is the best but I also like yidwithlid.blogspot.com/, michellemalkin.com, hotair.com, and occasionally some debbie schlussel though she tends to be a bit over the top.

            • Bob July 19, 2010, 10:16 AM

              I dont support him at all, let alone blindly I just think its ridiculous to label him as hating Jews based on absolutly nothing. You have absolutely nothing to base your accusation on. All youve said when I asked you to explain his diabolical secret plot was oh go check out what these other paranoid bloggers have to say

  • Anonymous July 16, 2010, 12:53 PM

    However dangerous you think Obama is, just wait ’till the gun-toting tea party nutjobs win an election. This video points this out in the funniest possible way

    • sk July 16, 2010, 6:20 PM

      But these “nutjobs” say they support Israel!

  • SJ July 16, 2010, 1:14 PM

    I know, a movement that calls for balancing the federal budget is sooooooooooooooooooo dangerous to Democrats, if its agenda actualizes, the Democrats will no longer be able to win elections by promising goodies with other people’s money.

    To the Democrats, that’s some scary sh#t.

    • A. Nuran July 16, 2010, 4:27 PM

      SJ, I’m surprised you could unwrap your lips from around Rush’s floppy 2-inch cigar long enough to talk.

      Let’s leave the Faux New Two Minute Hate Points alone for a while and consider the *shudder* reality based facts. Your hero Reagan multiplied the Federal deficit and National Debt to an unprecedented degree. Bush I continued the trend. They both raised spending, decreased government efficiency through no oversight privatization and – yes, their own budget directors confirmed this – devastated revenues by cutting taxes on the very wealthy and the largest corporations far beyond the levels under the Eisenhower Administration.

      Clinton actually ran a budget surplus for the first time in decades by merely undoing some of the most egregious giveaways and slowing the increase in military pork.

      Bush II spent the surplus, raised taxes on the Middle and Working class, slashed them on the very wealthiest, spent the surplus and quintupled the National Debt.

      He got us into the two longest wars in US history without any thought as to how to pay for the estimated three trillion dollar cost. He gave the worst of the banks a trillion dollars and allowed them to refinance it with 0% interest from the Fed. The pharma companies quite literally wrote the Medicare Part D bill for hundreds of billions of dollars with no cost containment and no mention of how to pay for it.

      These were the years of record earmarks, the quarter billion dollar Bridge to Nowhere and multi hundred billion dollar deals benefiting companies with which the President, Vice President and several cabinet members had ongoing financial interests. They provided new laws to subsidize moving American jobs overseas which put more into poverty and decreased the tax base even further.

      This was the Administration which said, and I quote, “Ronald Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter.”

      For about a hundred years Democrats have consistently and undeniably been better about fiscal discipline.

      And you are a Kool Aid drinking mindless parrot.

  • a must watch July 16, 2010, 2:43 PM
  • SJ July 16, 2010, 4:59 PM

    LOL A. Nuran you talk about hate from other people but you can’t possibly be hateful while dissing Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and me all in one post.

    Now to address your points,

    1) Conservatives don’t like too much spending whether it is done from Democrats or Republicans. I am a conservative, not a Republican faithful, I am against all big spending.

    However, we give Reagan a pass on the spending because he defeated the Soviet Union in an arms race and he rendered the USSR broke.

    2) It seems to me Reaganomics was more about tax cuts than about cutting spending. Reagan signed large tax cuts. In the Reagan years, the unemployment rate did indeed decrease. Both Bushes got the unemployment rate down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Unemployment_1890-2009.gif http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usunemployment&met=unemployment_rate&tdim=true&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+rate

    3) Real conservatives believe deficits do matter regardless of what administrations say.

    4) Clinton balanced the budget at the expense of the military as an attempt to literally castrate it. Obama blew up the national deficit much further than G.W. Bush did.

    • JT July 18, 2010, 11:29 AM

      Thanks for that helpful chart; if you’d read it, you’d note that Bush II inherited an unemployment rate from Clinton of 4.5%, and left office in disgrace with an unemployment rate of 8.7%, having contributed to one of the worst economic collapses in American history. “Got the unemployment rate down” my ass.

      • SJ July 18, 2010, 12:53 PM

        It was ok for most of GW Bush’s presidency.

        The recession was caused by people living beyond their means. Not because of Bush.

        • JT July 18, 2010, 2:33 PM

          Are you serious, man (or woman)? Whose policies do you think fueled the housing bubble that led to the subprime debacle? Who championed the expansion of home ownership as a means to greater economic prosperity? Shoddy loans were made, in part, because the Bush administration supported ‘personal responsibility’ and an ‘ownership society’; the deficit was caused in a large part by unsustainable tax cuts passed during war time, with no corresponding decrease in spending. The Bush administration was the first period in modern American history of zero net job growth. We are living through the Bush recession, and it ain’t pretty.

          • SJ July 19, 2010, 4:27 AM

            It is the Obama recession.

            Companies have plenty of money to create jobs. They’re just holding back because they don’t as of yet know how much Obama’s health and environment regulations are going to cost them. So, it is Obama’s fault.

  • FrumGer July 16, 2010, 6:44 PM

    A.Nuran, we agree on something.. good – my sentiments exactly… Though I hate this Dem in office, (Mostly because I didnt buy into the hype and really just rejected him because everyone was on his jock so much for no good reasons other than skin tone or because he can play bball…)
    I register Dem. and on most things I tend to take that side. I would say I am democratic socialist, and proud to be.

  • Yechiel July 18, 2010, 1:32 AM

    I never said studying is the secret to the Jewish people. I have been taught that following the laws was the most important thing. Do any of you really believe that Israel can count on any other country?

  • the other shim July 18, 2010, 5:39 AM

    I don’t think Israel should *depend* on America necessarily but America shouldn’t have a president who despises her either.

  • Phil July 18, 2010, 10:21 AM

    You yanks seem to take yourself too seriously. As if the American president is the one that decides Israel’s and worldwide Jewry’s fate.

    Here is my criteria for a good Amercian president:

    1) Must be very funny to watch on TV with the sound off. Dubya and Clinton were great at this, they provided me with 16 years of good laughs. Bush senior and Obama suck at it, hopefully Obama will lose the next election if he runs again.

    2) Must be willing to keep sending large amounts of money to Americans living abroad. Dubya started this, Obama claims to eventually make cutbacks, yet to see what happens.

    3) Must be willing to keep sending large amounts of money to Israel without any strings attached. The more $$$ the merrier.

    • the other shim July 18, 2010, 8:53 PM

      As much as I didn’t agree with his politics, I liked Clinton because he was human. He didn’t have the cyborg personality Obama does.

  • SJ July 18, 2010, 1:59 PM

    There is no such thing as a “Democratic Socialist.”

    Socialism = no private property.

    “Democratic socialist” = b.s. propaganda.

    • A. Nuran July 18, 2010, 3:46 PM

      Not even close. It would help if you understood something about the words that are coming out of your mouth.

      1) Democracy is a system in which political rule is by the people either directly or through representatives.

      2) Socialism is a broad term for economic systems under which the economy is run for the benefit of the people as a whole.

      Notice how the two terms have nothing to do with each other. In a Democracy the people could say “We want Socialism”. That’s democracy and socialism at at the same time.

      The Scandinavian countries practice their own form of Socialism. And the government is run by the people. They absolutely have private property and vigorously defend people’s right to it.

      So you are, not to put too fine a point on it, dead flipping wrong.

    • Shaul July 18, 2010, 8:17 PM

      “There is no such thing as a “Democratic Socialist.”’

      Well, there is Social Democracy, a Socialist ideology advocating the transition from capitalism to Socialism via democratic – as opposed to revolutionary – means. Parties based on the ideology are actually quite common in Europe.

      “Socialism = no private property.”

      That’s not true for every form of Socialism and thus an invalid definition.

      P.S: You seem overly fond of the equals sign.

  • SJ July 19, 2010, 8:28 AM

    * Yawn * Shaul, the USSR is the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics . They used the terms socialist and communist interchangeably. Separating socialism and communism is a false distinction.