Is It Fair to Ask if Obama's a Socialist?
|
|
|||||
|
33 votes
|
|
89% | |||
|
2 votes
|
|
5% | |||
|
2 votes
|
|
5% | |||
Is It Fair to Ask If Obama’s a Socialist?
Monday, May 28, 2012
As
campaign rhetoric heats up, pundits and talking-point guys and gals
debate what is on or off limits. Can or should the Democrats talk about
16-year-old “bully” Romney or about his “weirdness” (a veiled reference I
guess to his Mormon faith)? Can or should the Republicans revive
Reverend Wright’s black liberation rants, the Bill Ayers connection, or
the President’s youthful drug use, which apparently was prolific.
One such pundit on the democrat side (who and where I forget)
referred to “crazies” who call Obama a “socialist.” Such statements are
beyond the pale, he declared in disgust. They are on a par with the
“birther” claims.
Despite such dismissals, there is strong and legitimate interest in whether President Obama is a socialist. My Forbes piece Is President Obama Truly a Socialist continues
to attract many readers three months after it was posted. It showed the
remarkable overlap between Obama’s electoral platform and the Party of
European Socialists, which represents leftist and socialist parties in
the European parliament. My French Socialists Test Drive Obama’s Electoral Platform showed
that French socialist Francois Hollande’s and Obama’s platforms are
virtual carbon copies, and Hollande is quite open about and proud of
being a socialist.
Democrat strategists know that the American electorate reacts
strongly negative to “socialism” and are doing their best to discredit
any and all who call Obama a socialist. There can be no doubt that Obama
is a socialist in the European reform-Marxism tradition. In France,
Obama would be the candidate of the French socialist party. In Spain, he
would be at home in the Socialist Worker’s Party. In Germany, Obama
would be torn between the Social Democrats and Die Linke. In “Old
Europe,” the welfare state is well entrenched. Elections are about
tinkering at the margin. The United States has still to decide whether
it wants the European welfare state or not. Obama does. Romney does not.
Read More: http://www.thepatriotupdate.com
It gives insurance to people who can't afford it, but forces people to have it who don't need it. If the supreme court takes out the mandate, the LAW won't exist, but we'll still have the benefits of it.
Socialism, fascism and communism, your choice?
Under the Obama’s policies, industry remains in nominally private hands. The more accurate term, Corporatism forces the President to defend his policies that increase government control of private industries and expand subsidies to big businesses. This also promotes the understanding that though the current system may not be pure Socialism, neither is it free-market since government controls the private sector through taxes, regulations, and subsidies, and has done so for decades.