ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784089 wrote:No but you questioned why Bernie would have a problem with Citizens United, but failed to mention anything about PAC's. Just wondered if you felt they have no issues.

Con_Alma;1784091 wrote:No but they way current culture views current issues and how best to address them probably has.
You don't think people would liken FDR's policies to Marxism if he ran today?

Con_Alma;1784092 wrote:I question if Mr. Sanders has a problem with the stated principles of Citizens United and is so why?

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784093 wrote:No because I think Socialism is a lot broader than Marxism or Stalinism ..but that's just me.

superman;1784095 wrote:But you questioned his original post so it's on you to prove him wrong.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784093 wrote:No because I think Socialism is a lot broader than Marxism or Stalinism ..but that's just me.

ptown_trojans_1;1784074 wrote:Less than Trump is.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784094 wrote:Mr Sanders has mentioned his problem with Citizen's United ruling and allowing corporations to inject money into campaigns through Super PAC's. I think it's clear what his issues with the ruling are.

Con_Alma;1784097 wrote:I can appreciate that but you thinking socialism is more broad doesn't seem like it would preclude you from thinking that people today wouldn't the efforts of FDR to the point of calling it Marxism. People make all kinds of leaps in political arguments. This thread is a great example.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784100 wrote:I can agree with this. My question, though, was if FDR was likened to Karl Marx.

Con_Alma;1784099 wrote:Being opposed to the ruling isn't quite the same thing as being opposed Citiziens United. He may in fact be opposed to them. I truly don't know. It's why I asked if there's written statement saying as much. I was just surprised that a candidate would be opposed to the stated principles they publish. I don't think we should throw the baby out with the bath water.

Con_Alma;1784101 wrote:I couldn't answer that so I didn't try. I simply stated that if he ran today I believe he would be.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784102 wrote:I see what you're saying. I was speaking of the ruling though.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784103 wrote:And my point was if he was, he was also elected to 4 terms so it wasn't an issue then.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1784032 wrote:When you've got nothing constructive to say, pull the Hitler card. It's like playing the race card at every turn.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784094 wrote:Mr Sanders has mentioned his problem with Citizen's United ruling and allowing corporations to inject money into campaigns through Super PAC's. I think it's clear what his issues with the ruling are.

queencitybuckeye;1784107 wrote:Has he introduced a joint resolution to amend the constitution? That's the remedy, unless it's to constantly bitch until a case comes up that could overturn it.

Con_Alma;1784105 wrote:I don't dispute at all that is may not have been a issue then. I'm betting it certainly would be an issue today. That's what people have been chirping about.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784108 wrote:What happened in 2014?

ZWICK 4 PREZ;1784110 wrote:My question is why though?

queencitybuckeye;1784111 wrote:So you don't know the answer to my question.

bigkahuna;1784114 wrote:To be fair, the whole FDR 4 term thing has a lot of factors going into it than whether or not his policies were popular. I tend to agree with Zwick on some level, but let's be honest here.

bigkahuna;1784114 wrote:To be fair, the whole FDR 4 term thing has a lot of factors going into it than whether or not his policies were popular. I tend to agree with Zwick on some level, but let's be honest here.