subject: Sticks and Stones according to Jim [print this page] Sticks and Stones according to Jim Sticks and Stones according to Jim
THE SOCIALIST PARTY strives to establish a radical democracy that places people's lives under their own control - a non-racist, classless, feminist socialist society... where working people own and control the means of production and distribution through democratically-controlled public agencies; where full employment is realized for everyone who wants to work; where workers have the right to form unions freely, and to strike and engage in other forms of job actions; and where the production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few. Website: http://www.sp-usa.org/
"55 Percent of Likely Voters Find Socialist' an Accurate Label of Obama" When asked about "a socialist," 33 percent of likely voters say it describes Obama "very well," 22 percent say "well," 15 percent say "not too well," and 25 percent say "not well at all." In other words, 55 percent of likely voters think "socialist" is a reasonably accurate way of describing Obama. Website: The National Review, article by Jim Geraghty. You can also find Jim at Twitter @ jimgeraghty.
The term Social refers to a characteristic of living organisms (humans in particular, though biologists also apply the term to populations of other animals). It always refers to the interaction of organisms with other organisms and to their collective co-existence, irrespective of whether they are aware of it or not, and irrespective of whether the interaction is voluntary or involuntary. Website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social.
Now, I am just a bit confused. Because according to both the website "social" is a good thing so doesn't that mean according to Jim Geraghty 55%, is a good thing as well. Yet somehow, I get the feeling that 55% is not a good thing and the good thing would be good if the number was lower.
Is Jim a socialist? Jim has a twitter page and a facebook page and both of those sites are social networking sites. Does that mean Jim's huge number (following) is a good thing or a bad thing?
We tend to refer to others as if we are not. We give lucid names left to the interpretation and imagination of our listeners and readers. The labels we give others seem to suggest something other than favor, while we wear the same label and hope you don't notice it.
If I am one then what are you too? I am rubber and you are glue. Show me yours and I will show you mine. Is bigger really better? For better or for worse sticks and stones may break my bones but names can never hurt me.
