Lone Wolf,
Cries wolf ! Socialism and the DEFINITIONS
thereof are various and Billy Wharton identifies with a specific
definition of his own. Suffice it to say that the Obama and his ilk
are non niggardly with other peoples money. Obama's redistribution of
wealth is socialism ! Duhhhhh!
*********************************************************************************************************************
On Aug 5, 10:49 pm, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Like all bankrupts caught up in their own contradictions, you cannot
> address the facts and attempt to divert from this by reverting to
> inane slanders. Whether stateless socialism is utopian or not, is not
> pertinent to this thread. The question is, is Obama a socialist--the
> obvious answer is no.
>
> As for belief in religous mysticism--you seem content to worship at
> the alter of the false Gods of the failed free market and the American
> dream.
>
> Amen.
>
> On Aug 6, 9:12 am, Bruce Majors <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > he is a religious mystic
>
> > his fantasies of state-less socialism expose him as someone born with no
> > brain cells, or none that survived the dope
>
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:51 PM, Sage2 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Lone,
>
> > > Your arguement as as " faux " as Obama is. Obama is a
> > > socialist, just go to his books and writings and campaign lies!
>
> > > *******************************************************************************
>
> > > On Aug 5, 5:41 pm, "\"Lone Wolf\"" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Obama's No Socialist. I Should Know.
> > > > By Billy Wharton
> > > > Sunday, March 15, 2009; Page B01
>
> > > > The question "Is Obama a socialist?" spread rapidly through a network
> > > > of rightwing blogs, conservative television outlets and alarmist radio
> > > > talk shows and quickly moved into the mainstream. "We Are All
> > > > Socialists Now," declared a Newsweek cover last month.
>
> > > > All this speculation over whether our current president is a socialist
> > > > led me into the sea of business suits, BlackBerrys and self-promoters
> > > > in the studio at Fox Business News. I quickly realized that the
> > > > antagonistic anchor David Asman had little interest in exploring
> > > > socialist ideas on bank nationalization.
>
> > > > For Asman, nationalization was merely a code word for socialism. Using
> > > > logic borrowed from the 1964 thriller "The Manchurian Candidate," he
> > > > portrayed Obama as a secret socialist, so far undercover that not even
> > > > he understood that his policies were de facto socialist. I was merely
> > > > a cudgel to be wielded against the president -- a physical embodiment
> > > > of guilt by association.
>
> > > > The funny thing is, of course, that socialists know that Barack Obama
> > > > is not one of us. Not only is he not a socialist, he may in fact not
> > > > even be a liberal. Socialists understand him more as a hedge-fund
> > > > Democrat -- one of a generation of neoliberal politicians firmly
> > > > committed to free-market policies.
>
> > > > The first clear indication that Obama is not, in fact, a socialist, is
> > > > the way his administration is avoiding structural changes to the
> > > > financial system. Nationalization is simply not in the playbook of
> > > > Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and his team. They favor costly,
> > > > temporary measures that can easily be dismantled should the economy
> > > > stabilize. Socialists support nationalization and see it as a means of
> > > > creating a banking system that acts like a highly regulated public
> > > > utility. The banks would then cease to be sinkholes for public funds
> > > > or financial versions of casinos and would become essential to
> > > > reenergizing productive sectors of the economy.
>
> > > > The same holds true for health care. A national health insurance
> > > > system as embodied in the single-payer health plan reintroduced in
> > > > legislation this year by Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), makes
> > > > perfect sense to us. That bill would provide comprehensive coverage,
> > > > offer a full range of choice of doctors and services and eliminate the
> > > > primary cause of personal bankruptcy -- health-care bills.
>
> > > > Obama's plan would do the opposite. By mandating that every person be
> > > > insured, ObamaCare would give private health insurance companies
> > > > license to systematically underinsure policyholders while cashing in
> > > > on the moral currency of universal coverage. If Obama is a socialist,
> > > > then on health care, he's doing a fairly good job of concealing it.
>
> > > > Issues of war and peace further weaken the commander in chief's
> > > > socialist credentials. Obama announced that all U.S. combat brigades
> > > > will be removed from Iraq by August 2010, but he still intends to
> > > > leave as many as 50,000 troops in Iraq and wishes to expand the war in
> > > > Afghanistan and Pakistan.
>
> > > > A socialist foreign policy would call for the immediate removal of all
> > > > troops. It would seek to follow the proposal made recently by an
> > > > Afghan parliamentarian, which called for the United States to send
> > > > 30,000 scholars or engineers instead of more fighting forces.
>
> > > > Yet the president remains "the world's best salesman of socialism,"
> > > > according to Republican Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina. DeMint
> > > > encouraged supporters "to take to the streets to stop America's slide
> > > > into socialism." Despite the fact that billions of dollars of public
> > > > wealth are being transferred to private corporations, Huckabee still
> > > > felt confident in proposing that "Lenin and Stalin would love" Obama's
> > > > bank bailout plan.
>
> > > > Huckabee is clearly no socialist scholar, and I doubt that any of
> > > > Obama's policies will someday appear in the annals of socialist
> > > > history. The president has, however, been assigned the unenviable task
> > > > of salvaging a capitalist system intent on devouring itself. The
> > > > question is whether he can do so without addressing the deep
> > > > inequalities that have become fundamental features of American
> > > > society. So, President Obama, what I want to know is this: Can you
> > > > lend legitimacy to a society in which 5 percent of the population
> > > > controls 85 percent of the wealth? Can you sell a health-care reform
> > > > package that will only end up enriching a private health insurance
> > > > industry? Will you continue to favor military spending over
> > > > infrastructure development and social services?
>
> > > > My guess is that the president will avoid these questions, further
> > > > confirming that he is not a socialist except, perhaps, in the
> > > > imaginations of an odd assortment of conservatives. Yet as the
> > > > unemployment lines grow longer, the food pantries emptier and health
> > > > care scarcer, socialism may be poised for a comeback in America.
>
> > > > Obama a socialist?
> > > > By Scot Lehigh
> > > > Globe Columnist / March 11, 2009
>
> > > > OF ALL THE inane accusations about President Obama, the silliest has
> > > > to be this: The president is a socialist.
>
> > > > Obama's plans are "one big down payment on a new American socialist
> > > > experiment," asserts House minority leader John Boehner. He's "the
> > > > world's best salesman of socialism," says Republican Senator Jim
> > > > DeMint.
>
> > > > "Lenin and Stalin would love this stuff," declares Mike Huckabee. Sean
> > > > Hannity derides his agenda as "socialism you can believe in." Obama is
> > > > "a radical communist," warns kooky Alan Keyes.
> > > > "Epithets are substituting for thinking," observes Marc Landy,
> > > > professor of political science at Boston College.
>
> > > > Are they ever.
>
> > > > That has long been the case across vast realms of conservative talk
> > > > radio, of course. I recently heard one of our local luminaries who
> > > > regularly accuses Obama of Marxism offering a similar sort of
> > > > indispensable insight on another critical issue: Michelle Obama's
> > > > appearance during her husband's speech to Congress. The first lady's
> > > > face resembled that of a camel, while her body looked like the Liberty
> > > > Bell wrapped in purple, said WTKK's Jay Severin, who, hilariously,
> > > > fancies himself a political polymath leading a rarefied radio
> > > > discussion. (Severin imagines any number of things about himself that
> > > > are at considerable variance with the truth.)
>
> > > > So let's examine the matter. One defining aspect of socialism is state
> > > > ownership, control, or direction of the economy.
>
> > > > By contrast, despite the excuse of a crisis, Obama has resisted calls
> > > > from both left and right to temporarily nationalize teetering banks.
> > > > Similarly, if Obama were a socialist, crypto or otherwise, he would
> > > > surely be proposing government-run healthcare, rather than an
> > > > expansion that builds upon our current hybrid model.
>
> > > > Nor does his agenda compare to the democratic socialism of countries
> > > > like Denmark or Sweden, which have high taxation across a wide swath
> > > > of the population to fund a generous system of social benefits.
>
> > > > "What Obama even in his wildest moments is proposing is way short of
> > > > that," notes Landy.
> > > > What's really causing conservative conniptions is that Obama wants to
> > > > tax top earners more and spend some of that revenue on benefits -
> > > > healthcare, education, tax cuts, etc. - for others. His mortgage plan
> > > > has drawn similar ire.
>
> > > > But if he prevails, the two top income tax rates - 36 and 39.6 percent
> > > > - would still be well below those the country had for much of the last
> > > > six decades. The top rates were 90 percent or more from the mid-1940s
> > > > until the mid-1960s. They remained above 65 percent from the mid-1960s
> > > > until Ronald Reagan's presidency, when they were first cut to the 48
> > > > to 50 percent range and later to 28 percent with a "bubble" bracket
> > > > that taxed some income at 33 percent.
>
> > > > Taxes rose under both George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. During
> > > > Clinton's presidency, the top rates were set at 36 and 39.6 percent.
> > > > George W. Bush's tax cuts reduced those rates to 33 and 35 percent.
> > > > When those tax cuts expire, Obama favors letting the top rates revert
> > > > to 36 and 39.6 percent.
> > > > That
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
