Dodging the discussion. I asked you for some basis for your pejorative use of the phrase.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need,

What is wrong with the concept? I do not associate the idea with Marxism, I associate the concept with that of the early Christian Congregation. It seems you have a rather narrow view of ideas in general. I am not a marxist any more than you are a nazi. I have a spectre of Socialism in my bag of ideas because I am not afraid of names. I do not like to be cubby-holed as a this, or a that. I, like my genetic gene pool, am a combination of disciplines and dogmas that changes as I learn. How do you learn? I hope one of the reasons you visit this site is to learn about the other point of view. That is why I visit Powerline. Little Green Footballs and such. Is that why you are here Frank?

Just once I would like to hear a direct answer to a direct question without all the bobbing and weaving.

SadieB — So? Should I be surprised?

To both of you — the next time some conservative in these threads suggests that liberals are basically Marxists, I would expect you two to own up to it, as you have here.

p.s. SadieB: You couldn’t possibly be more wrong about Kirk; I can’t even tell you where to begin to truly understand him. Sad.

I learned several things. That the poor are poor because they are genetically inferior (from The Injustice of Equality). Justice is nothing more than a matter of maintaining private property rights (from The Meaning of Justice), and the proper role of the Church is to preach obedience to the State (ibid). Also no other nation is capable of democracy, since they lack our unique British heritage (The Degradation of the Democratic Dogma).

So now we know where you’re coming from, right? I believe I’ll take Marx over Kirk, for Marx once told us:

Ideas won by our intelligence, embodied in our outlook, and forged in our conscience, are chains from which we cannot tear ourselves away without breaking our hearts; they are demons we can overcome only by submitting to them.

Frank;

Is there something wrong with this idea? I don’t get it?

And. yes, that’s what I meant.

Sounds a lot like “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need,” to me.

Here in America, wage earners are called employees.

Frank;

I guess that’s your way of saying this sounds like Karl Marx rehashed?

Or am I reading to much into the cryptology?

He had given the speech to grovers and norquists three times before someone told him that the mortgage associations and the real estate associations were furious. He kept making the speech, but quieter. Ask him about it. He really believes middle class home ownership is hurting America.

Maybe you basement conservatives should consider what would happen to you if your family could not afford the house you live in. And how could a family, that has children so stupid that they must scream ‘Marx’ and ‘Commie’ at everything they do not understand, be smart enough to buy their own house without the Middle Class tax deduction?

Here is an idea whose time has come; Every conservative family should just give up that tax deduction as a protest to the communist idea that every one has a right to their own home. It is fair, and honest and balanced.

John Edwards clearly has not gotten the memo.

Oh please. People didn’t step in because of what the government did or didn’t do. People helped regardless of all that because that’s what Americans do. They don’t need to follow the governments lead to lend fellow citizens a helping hand in their time of need.

What happens when we “ask” and not “force” people to “hold up their end of the bargain” by staying in school, by working hard to obtain a marketable skill so as to obtain a higher-paying job and by waiting until after marriage before having children and they thumb their nose at you and refuse?

Just how does Edwards propose enforcing this virtue?

Not all that ballsy of a statement.