Originally Posted By Joe_Pennsy:
They don't even try to hide it.

Originally Posted By A_Free_Man:
Some good Commie art in Madison, WI. A friend in WI assures me this was real.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y209/AFreeMan/MadisonWIcommieart.jpg

Originally Posted By A_Free_Man:
Some good Commie art in Madison, WI. A friend in WI assures me this was real.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y209/AFreeMan/MadisonWIcommieart.jpg

Originally Posted By Mullah_Atari:


"Forward" is the Wisconsin state motto.

Originally Posted By Mullah_Atari:


"Forward" is the Wisconsin state motto.

Originally Posted By Mullah_Atari:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Coat_of_arms_of_Wisconsin.svg/200px-Coat_of_arms_of_Wisconsin.svg.png

Originally Posted By A_Free_Man:
Some good Commie art in Madison, WI. A friend in WI assures me this was real.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y209/AFreeMan/MadisonWIcommieart.jpg

Originally Posted By bigstick61:



I doubt the symbols of labour and the working class (proletariat) are a coincidence there. The whole thing is rife with that sort of symbolism. Kind of shows what was dominant when the Coat of Arms was created there, I suppose.

Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:


True, but they have a surfing badger.

Originally Posted By bigstick61:



I'm still trying to figure out the symbolism of that. The other stuff is obviously Marxist.

Originally Posted By bigstick61:



I'm still trying to figure out the symbolism of that. The other stuff is obviously Marxist.

Originally Posted By bigstick61:



I doubt the symbols of labour and the working class (proletariat) are a coincidence there. The whole thing is rife with that sort of symbolism. Kind of shows what was dominant when the Coat of Arms was created there, I suppose.

Originally Posted By bigstick61:



I'm still trying to figure out the symbolism of that. The other stuff is obviously Marxist.

Originally Posted By A_Free_Man:
Some good Commie art in Madison, WI. A friend in WI assures me this was real.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y209/AFreeMan/MadisonWIcommieart.jpg

Originally Posted By Kihn:
I think it was the part where Marx, Lenin, Trostky, Engels were associated with literature or organizations who used it as their Masthead that is concerning people. You have to admit, the Obama is into symbolism. And progressive causes....



Come on...out of 364/ 365 days out of the year, he had to pick the one that just oh so coincidentally is the Birthday of Karl Marx. Still waiting for the Che posters to start popping up again in all of the campaign offices across the nation.

Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:


The latter is a separate issue from the former. Don't see how. The issue of the thread is actions of Obama and his associates (i.e. Van Jones, the law professor, Ayers, Frank Marshal Davis, ACORN, Annenburg Foundation, etc...) that show strong associations with socialism/ communism on the part of the POTUS. These are legitimate observations. Are you denying that Che Guevara posters adorned Obama campaign offices in the 2008 election? Are you denying that Obama's history is significantly influenced by socialist causes?

Bullshit on the 364 others days option. You can find almost any day and posit some significance if you stretch enough. The fact is, "Marx's Birthday" has never been anything significant to any Marxist movement I have heard of. You say now? Are you saying that people that have not had a significant impact on humanity never have their birthdays observed by those societies and movements influenced by those icons? Washingrton's Birthday used to be noted and observed in an earlier time of our history. But that's not the point. Of all other potential days to officially launch a campaign why choose that as the day? Just a coinqy-dinky?

You mention Che - what about his birthday? What about May Day, which just passed? Why Marx's birthday?

Heck, most of the US flies flags on Che's birthday and the US Army celebrates on it every year! Do they fly Che flags to honor him and does the U.S. Army celebrate Che's birth?Are they adorning the walls of their offices with the image of Che? You are simply trying to create red herrings with this one.!

Originally Posted By Kihn:


ETA: just in case you missed it the first time:


http://www.hyscience.com/Obama%20Forward.jpg


Forward!!!!

Socialist Publications

Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:


Again, I have never doubted Obama was a Marxist. I even predicted if Romney looked like he were going to secure the Republican nomination we would see a swing to the left.

What I don't see is the significance of this "Marx's Birthday" thing. I think you and others would make a similar deal out of any other anniversary of any other numerous things. When someone says "why not the other 364 says?" I have to laugh. Within those 364 days are many, many far more important days to the history of Marxism. Lenin's birthday just passed, May Day just passed. Then of course there's November 7th (A bit late to start a campaign, then).

Thus, when someone says the other 364 days would all be better, they show a profound IGNORANCE of the number of days more significant to socialist history. Therefore, when they turn around and post links to things and try to "teach me" about such history, they should fully expect I then, A) realize they just learned of these things within the past day and B) They really know very little about socialist history that wasn't spoon fed to them by Glen Beck or similar personality.

Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:


Commies!

My favorite was a thread where someone insisted the Phrygian cap was a purely Communist symbol. I never got a reply after I posted this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Seal_of_the_US_Department_of_the_Army.svg

Americans in general really don't know our history - and then we let talk radio hosts and politically motivated salespeople teach us their version.

Originally Posted By sixnine:
Still doesn't make Marx's birthday irrelevant, just means there were other options.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Originally Posted By Kihn:


Like today or Sunday. Or even Monday. Now that's the day to state your seriousness about the people's obligation of working for the benefit of the state. Worklike. Laborious. Serious. Not Communist Party Saturday.....

Originally Posted By bigstick61:



I doubt the symbols of labour and the working class (proletariat) are a coincidence there. The whole thing is rife with that sort of symbolism. Kind of shows what was dominant when the Coat of Arms was created there, I suppose.

Originally Posted By Bohr_Adam:


Monday?

You mean the day named after the Moon? And, as "we all" know, Islam is the religion of the moon god! That would be all the "proof" I would need that he is signaling to his followed the Caliphate is upon us!

Do you not see how stupid this is?

Originally Posted By South_Side_Shooter:
By now, most have heard of the Obama campaign’s new slogan, “Forward,” and the dubious scrubbing of all references to the Marxist origins of the motto on its Wikipedia entry.

Obama’s social militarism inverts civil-military relations in a democratic republic. Traditionally—and one suspects that this is still the case for practically all servicemen—men and women join the Armed Forces because they believe America is worthy of their duty and protection. But Obama seems to suggest that, sorry, we are not quite there yet. The America that actually is “worthy of their sacrifice” has not come into existence. It exists “forward,” somewhere in the future. We must bring it into being by emulating the self-sacrificing troops, by suppressing our ambition and disagreement and differences, by “focusing on the mission” of building our country on a New Foundation.

The problems with this mindset are obvious. Obama has it totally backwards. The greatness of our troops derives from the fact that they sacrifice so the American people can enjoy their constitutionally protected liberty to pursue happiness in manifold ways. What the soldiers are protecting—and what the president swears to uphold and defend—does not exist in the future but was ratified more than 200 years in the past: The Constitution of the United States, whose separation of powers, federalism, and checks and balances protect the liberties defined as self-evident in the Declaration of Independence. These documents may be old and sometimes “confusing,” but they have served our country admirably and are the reason America is exceptional in a way that England and Greece are not.

Nor is a continent-spanning economy something that you command like an army, especially if it is a more-free-market-than-not economy with established property rights and the rule of law. Free economies fuel prosperity by relying on the inspiration, innovation, investment, consumption, labor, and trial and error of hundreds of millions of individuals making independent decisions, not all of which conform with what liberals in the press and politics currently view as “rational.”

A nation, a free nation, is not an army. The citizens of a free nation do not always share consumer preferences or a sense of common purpose. Like a good jobs czar, GE’s Jeff Immelt may want all American to “root” for his company and do what they can to help it succeed, but Americans still have every right to take their business elsewhere. There is something undemocratic in thinking that one should stop squabbling, strap on their boots, and get to work for Obama. One would do that only if the questions surrounding public life and public policy are settled. But they are not settled—not at all. Obama acknowledges as much when he laments he is not president of China or when he says that bypassing Congress and changing the laws “on my own is very tempting.”

In his likening of the nation to an army, Obama once again reduces the conflict between conservatism and liberalism to its core. The goal of modern liberalism, wrote Leo Strauss, “may be said to be the universal and classless society or, to use the correction proposed by Kojève, the universal and homogenous state of which every adult human being is a full member.” That sounds very much like membership in a battalion.

Against this, modern conservatives propose the goal of a constitutional federal republic, where the equal protection of natural rights necessarily will result in inequalities of property or achievement simply because men have different skills and talents. “Conservatives look with greater sympathy than liberals on the particular or particularist and the heterogeneous,” Strauss wrote. We are more likely to wish to preserve our differences, in the knowledge that the liberal project of uniformity is undesirable and unfeasible. We are the conscientious objectors to Obama’s forward march. And we are not alone.

Originally Posted By paris-dakar:
A good read on all this 'Forward' nonsense: Generalissimo Obama.

Originally Posted By ColdboreDreamer:
http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~pv/pv/courses/posters/images3/forward1.jpg