Above is an example of the "products" available to those attending the Right-Wing Family Research Council's "Values Voter Summit."
On the bottom of the box, the text reads "Point box toward Mecca for tastier waffles."
The side of the box has a "bonus recipe rap" that reads:
Barry's Bling Bling Waffle Ring
Yo, B-rock here droppin' waffle knowledge Spellin' it out, 'cause a graduated college Some say I waffle so fast, Barry's causin' whiplash Just doin' my part, made wafflin' a fine art For a waffle wit style, like Chicago's Magnificent Mile Spray whipped crem around the edge Shake it first like Sister Sledge. The say wit me, I can be as waffly as I wanna be! (That goes out to my Ludacris posse)
I don't think there is anymore to be said about these McCain-Palin supporters. They speak for themselves.
66 comments:
Why am I not the least bit surprised.
I agree that is not in good taste (pardon the pun) but spare me the self righteous attitude that "I am not the least bit surprised" as though Democrats are innocent of crossing the line when it comes to political lampoons. At least I will admit when it is wrong, will you?
This is not just over-the-top political lampoon. This is blatant racism.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAA
CatholicsForDemocracy said...
"This is blatant racism."
Oh really? Why? Because Obama is in the picture? Welllll he is black. So that makes it racism? Maybe they should have colored him white?
Ya know this proves what a lack of credibility you have Demo. Racism my foot.
Demo, I saw the video on your blog lampooning Sarah. It was worse than this but I thought it was funny. And here you are yelling racism! wah wah wah
Sean2, those lampoons are funny. The Dems/libs do worse than that all the time. Don't wimp out on us.
It's about time the right wing start returning the favors.
"Demo, I saw the video on your blog lampooning Sarah. It was worse than this but I thought it was funny. And here you are yelling racism! wah wah wah"
The significant difference is that the video you saw in my blog lampooned Palin on her lack of experience and her b.s. answers in her actual interview, not who she is as a person... a woman.
The nonsense being discussed here is lampooning Obama because of who he is as a person... a black man.
If you think challenging someone's lack of experience and knowledge is worse than challenging someone because of who they are demographically, you need your head examined.
The fact of the matter is that someone's experience and knowledge is absolutely relevant to the substantial question of who we should elect into public office. So lampooning someone on that matter is absolutely fair game.
Whether someone is a woman or black or anything else having to do with biology is not relevant to their ability to hold high public office is not.
"Once again your scummy low life character reveals itself. You just can't help making those kinds of statements can you?
You are a hypocrite."
Perhaps you need schooling on what the word, "hypocrite" means. But there's nothing hypocritical about what I'm writing. Bristol's mother, Gov. Sarah Palin, is on record absolutely opposed to sex education. As a vice-Presidential candidate, Sarah brings that argument to the national stage. Her own daughter, Sarah, is prime anecdotal evidence that her position does not work. It's fair game to use it.
As to hypocricy, you are hardly in a position to point fingers. You were the one who called the college freshman Deal Hudson got drunk and pressured her into having sex a whore and a tramp.
The difference is that in discussing Deal Hudson, we were discussing a man attempting to leverage political power. Discussion of him is on the table. When discussing Bristol, we are discussing the power her mother seeks to wield. Because her mother is opposed to sex education, Bristol's pregnancy is relevant and on the table.
The eighteen-year-old Deal Hudson inappropriately engaged never sought public office, nor did she ever act in any way that makes her publicly relevant. So she was never legitimately on the table.
DEMO SAID: "You were the one who called the college freshman Deal Hudson got drunk and pressured her into having sex a whore and a tramp."
Please show us the quote where I said that.
You're still a hypocrite.
Sarah Palin, is on record absolutely opposed to sex education. As a vice-Presidential candidate, Sarah brings that argument to the national stage. Her own daughter, Sarah, is prime anecdotal evidence that her position does not work.
Now that is just a plain silly argument. How long have our schools been teaching sex education and passing out free birth control? According to your logic then we shouldn't have any teen pregnancies because sex education works. But the truth is the exact opposite. Mandatory sex education in schools is an utter failure. Not to mention the fact the schools are abrogating my rights as a parent by teaching this. Is it fair to say then CFD that you are opposed to abstinence only education because it doesn't work and pro-birth control to avoid pregnancy?
"Please show us the quote where I said that.
Actually, you didn't say that. I just went back and looked. Somebody calling himself, "Bob", said that. You just defended Bob after I redress him for it. So you're guilty by association.
That dialogue can be found here:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8009484025319372088&postID=2035123183423616478
CFD, why don't you answer the question about birth control and abstinence education?
"Is it fair to say then CFD that you are opposed to abstinence only education because it doesn't work and pro-birth control to avoid pregnancy?"
I think it is safe to say that I think young people should have proper knowledge about the consequences of their choices. It is also safe to say that I am not so naive that young people and teenagers are not going to have sex.
Is purity the right way to go for teenagers? Of course. And most parents would like to think their teenager child agrees. But that is simply not the case.
Teenagers should be taught the full range of issues related to sexuality, including options to prevent pregnancy and being infected with undesirable viruses.
What matters in the Palin case is not whether Bristol would have had sex as a sixteen-year-old girl. What matters is whether she would have gotten pregnant. Abstinence-only education prevented neither.
Abstinence-only education prevented neither.
NO, the pregnancy was not prevented because these two individuals and thousands like them decided to act despite what they knew.
So I assume since you advocate for teaching kids about options, (birth control pill, condoms, etc) you encourage their use in avoiding pregnancy, otherwise why teach them about contraception?
Amazing how a discussion about racist political lampooning/marketing became a discussion about birth control.
DEMO: "You just defended Bob after I redress him for it. So you're guilty by association."
Demo, you're having hallucinations again.
Thanks for posting that link. You need to go back and read the whole thing.
The main point is that you accused a man of something without proof of what really happened.
Women do it all the time. They will entice a man time and again and then turn on him and claim that he did something he didn't do. Check your Bible you find such stories in there.
YOU SAID: "So you can call an eighteen year old girl, whose life led her to be a ward of the State, whose intellect got her into the prestigious Fordham University, a tramp. I won't."
Yeah, but you forget I didn't call her a tramp and the word whore wasn't found in the entire thread. Your credibility takes another plunge.
You accused a man with no proof. And you can't tell me that it didn't happen this way.
"Some college girl wants a better grade in class, gets a little tipsy, goes with her professor to his office, seduces him, and then blames him for everything."
DEMO SAID: "On that note, yes. I am a homo."
I already knew that Demo. But that does clear things up for everyone else. And since you think that sex with another man is OK how is it that a married man having sex with an 18 year old girl isn't (BTW 18 is NOT underage. She is legaly an adult and it is not rape.). Do you pick and choose as to what kind of illicit, immoral sex is OK and which isn't?
See? You're a hypocrite.
That waffle box is so racist. I KNOW I wasn't the only one to think of Aunt Jemima when I saw that. And that "rap" on the side? Please.
No one is talking about it, but race is still a huge factor. And the reason why no one is "in the least bit surprised" is because the Republicans so far have - both at the RNC and in numerous TV spots - spread lies and attacked Barack for his character and not his policies. It is not beneath them to promote this ridiculous piece of garbage as "good ol' humor."
An important question to ask is why they're doing this. What could possibly be the reason for such character (and racial) attacks on Obama? To cover up their own inadequacies, perhaps? Or maybe try to "blanket" their real racism?
DEMO SAID: "Sarah, is prime anecdotal evidence that her position does not work."
Ya know, every liberal I ever knew claims that anecdotal evidence means nothing.
It's proof that nothing is failsafe and that's all. Since you practice immoral sex then why are you even opening your big mouth about this. Is it because you didn't get sex education?
We have already seen that sex education increases the problems. Too many times we find that the teachers teaching sex ed because it turns them on.
It's all porn Demo. They need to quit calling it sex ed.
Amazing how a discussion about racist political lampooning/marketing became a discussion about birth control.
There is no discussion. The Church teaches that artificial birth control is wrong. I just wanted people to publicly admit what I knew to be true, playing loose with the term Catholicsfor...while disagreeing with Catholic teaching.
"There is no discussion. The Church teaches that artificial birth control is wrong. I just wanted people to publicly admit what I knew to be true, playing loose with the term Catholicsfor...while disagreeing with Catholic teaching."
And when we're in a thread addressing that matter, we can continue that conversation. This thread is about racism, and it's ugly head having been raised by so-called "Christian" conservatives. Or are you afraid to address that question?
"Maybe they should have colored him"
no need to have him colored.he's always been colored!!1 haha
SEAN2 SAID: "I just wanted people to publicly admit what I knew to be true, playing loose with the term Catholicsfor...while disagreeing with Catholic teaching."
Sean2, they won't admit anything of the such. Haven't you figured it out yet. We'll dealing with hard core Marxists.
DEMO "This thread is about racism, and it's ugly head having been raised by so-called "Christian" conservatives. Or are you afraid to address that question?"
It's a non-issue. Got anything else to whine about?
Or are you afraid to address that question?
I did, see the second comment in the post. I cannot speak for Christian conservatives. My concern is for those who call themselves Catholics but disagree with Catholic teaching. Nor am I foolish enough to condone the actions of nitwits or make blanket statements condemning everyone who might vote Republican as being an accomplice to the actions of a few. The two men who came up with this idea were selling their product at a space rented out at a conference. That does not necessarily indicate endorsement of what they were selling. In fact they told by the organizers to discontinue selling the item when they were made aware of it. Now trying to be a good Catholic I am obliged to take them at their word unless there is irrefutable evidence to the contrary.
"It's a non-issue. Got anything else to whine about."
It's an issue here. And it's an issue among many people of color still struggling to get a foot-hold into the American dream.
That it is a non-issue to you says a little something about you. So the issue stands. This caricature is racist and offensive to millions of Americans.
It is also offensive to Catholics who see our fellow brothers and sisters created in the image and likeness of God as people worthy of the dignity God created them in.
So, no. This issue stands. And I want an honest answer from those, even you, do you or do you not see your fellow human person created in the image and likeness of God worthy of that dignity, or are you willing to make distinctions. If you're willing to make those distinctions, be hones up-front. At least, we'll have an honest debate, and not just a sarcastic one.
Sean2, they won't admit anything of the such.
They have admitted it, they just won't acknowledge it.
Hey Demo, Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Hey Demo, do you live in a black neighborhood?
Yes Betty, why are we not surprised.
The publication [Atlantic Monthly]hired photographer Jill Greenberg, who is a strong McCain opponent, to take pictures of the candidate for an article.
However, Greenberg took some of the photos from her shoot and doctored the images to attack McCain.
In one, she places a caption above his head with the words, "I will have my girl kill Roe v. Wade." The fictitious comment is an obvious reference to Palin, the pro-life Alaska governor McCain chose as his vice-presidential running mate.
This isn't the first time Greenberg has made waves.
In the 2004 election, she held an art exhibit in Los Angeles featuring pictures of crying infants in a display attacking President Bush with the caption “Four More Years.” She admitted to intentionally making the babies cry.
"Hey Demo, do you live in a black neighborhood?"
Hey, rustler,
Does the answer to that question matter?
To CatholicsForDemocracy, I agree with you. The item is racist. It's to Obama's credit that he hasn't made an issue of it -- and if he did make an issue of it, he'd be justified.
sean2 is correct that this group was asked to stop distributing their "waffles". They were asked to 2 1/2 days into their 3 day conference. Seemingly none of the conservative political activist attendees found it to be anything to object to until the last day of the conference, but only after this made the general interest press wsa any action taken.
And while a request was made, it was not enforced and the group continued to distribute this material unimpeded by the "good Christians" in charge.
Lastly, on the issue of artificial contraception, the only presidential couple that has declared they use artificial contraception in violation of natural law has been Senator and the Second Mrs. McCain.
The reason this turned out to be a birth control/pro-life thread is that in the eyes of Rustler and Sean nothing else matters.
I knew when I saw the waffle box that it would not offend Rustler. He has insinuated the same things before. Look at the quote from the New York Times today from a Scranton Catholic parishioner:
"One parishioner ruled out voting for Mr. Obama explicitly because he is black. “Are they going to make it the Black House?” Ray McCormick asked, to embarrassed hushing from a half dozen others gathered around the rectory kitchen. (Five of the six, all lifelong Democrats who supported Mrs. Clinton in the primary, said they now lean toward Mr. McCain.)"
See how no one publicly called him out as being a racist thing to say. They just hushed him as if to say, Ray this is the sort of thing you do in private.
Not long ago Catholics were looked down upon by white protestants in America. My, how far we have come! We now get to look down on other ethnic groups. We have assimilated so well.
You are right Marie-Elsie, birth control is at the foundation of the whole issue. The Church emphatically teaches that artificial contraception is wrong. If people want to disagree with this then stop calling yourselves Catholic.
Katherine,
Spare me
marie-elsie,
"The reason this turned out to be a birth control/pro-life thread is that in the eyes of Rustler and Sean nothing else matters."
I think a more important reason is that they're not interested in engaging good-faith dialogue. There only aim is to disrupt meaningful conversation. It's easy to be a broken record when you're not really trying to communicate anything of substance.
I'm sure we will see more of this type of racism as the campaign continues. The most important thing is for decent people to stand up and call them on it.
What they lack in shame, they make up in pure hatred.
"Hey, rustler, Does the answer to that question matter?"
If it didn't you wouldn't be afraid to answer?
"'Hey, rustler, Does the answer to that question matter?'
If it didn't you wouldn't be afraid to answer?"
Nice try. But you're adding a leading question in a blog post about race. The ball is back in you court. Why does your question matter?
I am a support of Allan Keyes. He is black. I am a supporter of Cardinal Arinze. He is also black. I am against Obama, not because he is black, but because he is a lying Marxist rat.
The waffle cartoon is still funny. And Obama is still an axx even if they bleach him out.
DEMO WHINES INDIGNANTLY AS IF HE'S NOT A HYPOCRITE: "I think a more important reason is that they're not interested in engaging good-faith dialogue. There only aim is to disrupt meaningful conversation."
Hey Demo Know-it-all, you don't have any meaningful conversation nor good-faith dialogue. I have given you several chances and all you do is bump, grind, and dodge.
You are merely into liberal rhetoric that you've had programmed into you.
BTW you do a lot of whining, yapping, and blah blah blahing.
"Hey Demo Know-it-all, you don't have any meaningful conversation nor good-faith dialogue. I have given you several chances and all you do is bump, grind, and dodge."
I'm sorry you're not feeling paid-attention to, Rustler. But, you know. Sometimes, when grownups are having a grownup conversation, little children who attempt to disrupt that grownup conversation with insults, redirect efforts and ad hominem attacks get ignored.
If you cannot cope with that, I would suggest you:
a) participate in the grownup conversation like a grownup; or
b) go wade in the children's pool.
of course, there's always option c) just STFU.
got that Demo. Rustler likes more Black people that a whiney lib like you. But I bet you like the Black mamas, huh, Demo???
hey, CATHOLICS FOR EMO, aren't you the guy that made nasty remarks about downs babies as being something less than you are? Now you're getting all sissy-shrill about a waffle and syrup being racist?......are we missing something? Is there a race of people around here with waffle heads or something?....do we need tee-shirts....."waffles are people too!"......
And now for the rest of the story: The FRC wasn't selling these offensive waffles; didn't condone or sanction the product; and shut down the vendors so they couldn't get away with selling racist attitudes for breakfast.
As to the waffles? They are strictly evidence of the small-mindedness of Mark Whitlock and Bob DeMoss, the vendors.
Don't group the FRC or McCain supporters with these two guys. If you do, you're as guilty of stereotyping as anyone who would use race as a weapon in this election.
"got that Demo. Rustler likes more Black people that a whiney lib like you."
Yeah, just imagine. Millions of black people in the United States alone, not to mention the countless more worldwide; and Rustler was able to name a whole two he actually likes.
And, sorry. Alan Keyes doesn't count. I don't know too many black people willing acknowledge Keyes as representative of their race. Poor Keyes. No body else wants to claim him either.
And now for the rest of the story: The FRC wasn't selling these offensive waffles; didn't condone or sanction the product;
Dear Mary in Co,
You need to refer back to my earlier comment. For two and a half out of three days of the conference, there was no objection by FRC to this part of their confab. And with the huge number of 'good Christians' at the conference, none seemingly found it offensive enough to say a word about. Only towards the very end of the conference once media reports started cirulating did they request the 'waffle' boxes not be displayed. And even then they took no action to enforce their request as the boxes kept being distributed.
There you have the rest of the story.
"hey, CATHOLICS FOR EMO, aren't you the guy that made nasty remarks about downs babies as being something less than you are?"
No. I'm the guy asked Rustler, who presents himself as an academic and intellectual, "are you really that retarded?". There is a big difference between disparaging someone who has Down's Syndrome and questioning the intelligence of someone professing to be an intellectual.
EMOCATHOLIC: "And, sorry. Alan Keyes doesn't count. I don't know too many black people willing acknowledge Keyes as representative of their race."
Well well well you just admitted your racism.
Here's whole host of black people whom you dismiss as black because of their politics who acknowledge Alan Keyes as the best representative they have ever had (Walter Williams, Bill Cosby, The Black Avenger, George Schuyler, Collin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, etc., etc.).
And your examples of true black people are? Jesse Jackson, Rev. Wright, and which other Marxists?
You just get scummier and scummier.
CATHOLICS FOR EMO......YOU ARE NOT VERY HONEST ARE YOU? i read your post and you did denigrate downs babies.....in particular Sara Palin's, get it deleted before you continue to lie about it. you said it.....EMO.....it was obvious how you feel about Downs babies. That statement is the no.1 reason I am on this blog. only a liberal would say something like that. I never knew a person who said things like that like that who was not also a racist.
EMO SAID: "Actually, you didn't say that. I just went back and looked. Somebody calling himself, "Bob", said that."
Well that's what happens when you shoot your big mouth off without knowing what you are talking about. Of course that's normal for you.
of course, there's always option c) just STFU.
Hmmm, perhaps we should follow Katherines rules before commenting?
"A high-level Reagan era diplomat, a media personality and a conservative political activist, Alan Keyes is well-known as a staunch pro-life champion and a leader in the effort to restore the eroded sovereignty of the American people by securing our borders, abolishing the federal income tax and bringing the federal Judiciary back within proper constitutional bounds. He formally severed his Republican affiliation in April. He has since joined with other conservatives of conscience seeking to forge an Independent alternative in 2008 and has been nominated by the newly minted America's Independent Party as its choice for president. His name will appear as an alternative to Obama and McCain on many states' ballots, and will be available as a write-in on most others. More information and useful links can be found at www.alankeyes.com, www.americasrevival.com or at www.aipnc.com. "
This is the man who EMO says doesn't represent black people. EMO a self-professed Political "Scientist" doesn't even know that a politician is not supposed to represent special interests. They are to represent the Constitution and protect the rights of ALL citizens.
Again where's the adult conversation EMO? Go back to your corner and suck your thumb.
"EMO a self-professed Political "Scientist" doesn't even know that a politician is not supposed to represent special interests."
Since we're clearing up who said what, I NEVER professed to be a political scientist. You keep calling me that; even after I reiterated I was not. So before you jump on someone for misrepresenting others' statements, put your own assertions of others' statements in check.
Special interests? What special interests are you talking about?
I think if Barry Hussein Obama doesn't like his waffle box, he should get in touch with his inner Aunt Jehmima and get over it!
It's a joke, dude. Can't babykillers take a joke?
"It's a joke, dude. Can't babykillers take a joke?"
Speaking of sick jokes, here's one for you:
How many Republicans does it to take to totally tank the economy of the world's richest nation?
Katherine, you really know how to entertain. Don't forget to put on your blackface.
Racist?? Stereotypical maybe. But racist??
yes, racist.
How many Republicans does it to take to totally tank the economy of the world's richest nation?
I don't know but the Belgian government came out with a statement saying that the economic situation in the U.S. is better than that facing Europe. And most of those countries are being run or were run by Socialists like Obama until the people finally threw them out (France, Germany) But they still have to recover from the damage done by those progressive policies. Note that even with all their economic programs for the poor there are still substantial numbers of women having abortions. In fact Sweden, arguably the most socialist country on Earth wants to become the abortion capital, offering free abortions to anyone seeking one. Economics will not reduce abortion.
Oil and gas prices there are out of control but GWB cannot be to blame for that since Shell and BP are two of the largest oil companies in the world and and located in Europe.
Thanks, Regina. I guess whatever you say goes.
I don't know but the Belgian government came out with a statement saying that the economic situation in the U.S. is better than that facing Europe.
Then why are Bush and McCain insisting on a new government super-corporation with wide powers to buy up all sorts of assets?
And most of those countries are being run or were run by Socialists like Obama until the people finally threw them out
France has a Conservative government since 1995 and the Socialists only governed 14 years of the 64 years since Liberation.
As for Belgium, the Catholic Party ruled from 1958-1999 and is currently a member of the government. The Socailists have never governed Belgium.
Note that even with all their economic programs for the poor there are still substantial numbers of women having abortions.
Actually, no. The abortion rate in every western european country is lower than the USA, and even Catholic nations like Mexico, Phillipines and Brazil. The Netherlands has one of the lowest abortion rates in the world.
"The Netherlands has one of the lowest abortion rates in the world."
Of course, homos don't need to utilize the option of abortion.
That's just really heartwarming Katherine. You're a real genius.
no. The abortion rate in every western european country is lower than the USA, and even Catholic nations like Mexico, Phillipines and Brazil. The Netherlands has one of the lowest abortion rates in the world.>
That is because they are contracepting themeselves out of existence. That is why they have a negative births/deaths ratio and won't be able to survive another generation. But that wasn't my comment. I said there were substantial numbers, not a comparison to numbers in the U.S.
As for Belgium, the Catholic Party ruled from 1958-1999 and is currently a member of the government. The Socailists have never governed Belgium
Nevertheless the King had to abdicate rather than sign into law abortion on demand. Not to mention that although Belgium is 90% Catholic barely 10% attend Mass regularly. That means the majority of the population is living in mortal sin
Castellanus wrote:
But that wasn't my comment. I said there were substantial numbers, not a comparison to numbers in the U.S.
Then compared to what? I woudl agree one abortion is too many. But you suggested the social systems in these country leads to abortion. All evidence is that the only thing more effective is to live under Muslim Sharia.
That means the majority of the population is living in mortal sin
Maybe so. But your assertion was that these countries were governed by the Socialists. I proved you wrong and like John McCain your response is to change the topic.
I would agree one abortion is too many. But you suggested the social systems in these country leads to abortion.
I'm glad you agree that one abortion is too many. Now how about advertising on your blog the 40 Days for Life event?
No, here is what I said, "Note that even with all their economic programs for the poor there are still substantial numbers of women having abortions. Now if you want to twist that into suggesting that I said that their social systems lead to abortions, well I can't help you and it is no wonder you are so mixed up.
But your assertion was that these countries were governed by the Socialists. I proved you wrong
Again no. I said most of these countries and listed (France and Germany) The only time I mentioned Belgium was to say that their Govt reported that Europe is in worse shape than the U.S. economically. BTW the "Catholic Party" in Belgium merged decades ago into a different party. Their is currently no "Catholic Party" in Belgium. Nor did I say that they were always run by Socialists but that recently the Socialists were run out by more right-wing governments. But you are correct that the Socialists only governed for 14 years in France. Of course that was up until the mid 90's when they started losing ground. So thank you more confirming my statement. I apologize though for not being more specific when naming Socialists, they just happened to be the largest block of the leftist political groups.
I'm glad you agree that one abortion is too many. Now how about advertising on your blog the 40 Days for Life event?
I have written about life issues on this blog and am happy to do so again. I would conservative commentators woudl keep to to the thread. We have got the message that most of them have nothing to talk about but abortion criminalization. Alos, I wish the right wing Catholic blogs would take on the rality of the sin of racism.
No, here is what I said, "Note that even with all their economic programs for the poor there are still substantial numbers of women having abortions. Now if you want to twist that into suggesting that I said that their social systems lead to abortions, well I can't help you and it is no wonder you are so mixed up.
I appreciate the clarification. Obviously what you say is just as true as the fact that even with legal restrictions on abortions there still are substanial numbers.
I said most of these countries and listed (France and Germany) The only time I mentioned Belgium was to say that their Govt reported that Europe is in worse shape than the U.S. economically. BTW the "Catholic Party" in Belgium merged decades ago into a different party. Their is currently no "Catholic Party" in Belgium. Nor did I say that they were always run by Socialists but that recently the Socialists were run out by more right-wing governments. But you are correct that the Socialists only governed for 14 years in France. Of course that was up until the mid 90's when they started losing ground. So thank you more confirming my statement. I apologize though for not being more specific when naming Socialists, they just happened to be the largest block of the leftist political groups.
If you are not claiming that th general social system in most western European countries were developed and implemented by the Socialists but your point is that in Europe, governments alternate between Socialist and non-socialist parties, there is no debate there. (Germany currently has a Christian Democratic - Socialist coalition). If your point is the current economic problems in western Europe are due to the Socialists such as those parties currently in power such as in the UK and Spain, those formerly in power such as France and Italy or those in coalition such as Germany, it would be helpful to be specific.
To say the Socialists were in power and these coutnries have economic problems really does not say anything.
Post a Comment