Jump to content

The American People voted for Socialism.


Recommended Posts

According to the Reverend Al Sharpton the American people voted for Socialism when they voted for Barack Obama.

Didn't Barack try and distance himself from socialism? From what I remember, every time someone brought it up he said, "Now wait a minute, I want to be clear..." never admitting to being a "socialist". He, for some reason, found the word unpleasant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

According to the Reverend Al Sharpton the American people voted for Socialism when they voted for Barack Obama.

Didn't Barack try and distance himself from socialism? From what I remember, every time someone brought it up he said, "Now wait a minute, I want to be clear..." never admitting to being a "socialist". He, for some reason, found the word unpleasant.

This just in a Talk Radio host said something stupid. Rush and Beck do this everyday yet where are you Pliny to reply too them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the Reverend Al Sharpton the American people voted for Socialism when they voted for Barack Obama.

Didn't Barack try and distance himself from socialism? From what I remember, every time someone brought it up he said, "Now wait a minute, I want to be clear..." never admitting to being a "socialist". He, for some reason, found the word unpleasant.

Socialism has a very negative stigma in the United States. Regardless of whether or not some of Barrack's policies are socialist, he does not want them perceived as socialism, given the vast misunderstandings that Americans apply to the term.

Now, if he were 100% honest (which no politician is), he could have admitted to being socialist, and then engaged in a year long semantic battle, to get Americans to understand what socialism really means. But, it's much easier to break it down into bite size pieces as free education and Medicare, which few Americans seem to be opposed to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Socialism has a very negative stigma in the United States. Regardless of whether or not some of Barrack's policies are socialist, he does not want them perceived as socialism, given the vast misunderstandings that Americans apply to the term.

Now, if he were 100% honest (which no politician is), he could have admitted to being socialist, and then engaged in a year long semantic battle, to get Americans to understand what socialism really means. But, it's much easier to break it down into bite size pieces as free education and Medicare, which few Americans seem to be opposed to.

Possibly...

But do you really think those tea party nutjobs are even interested in listening and debating?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We already know what a failure the capitalists' attempt at low-income housing has turned out - a world wide recession. In comparison, socialistic Canada with its highly regulated banking system and universal health care is still doing alright.

As America passes Health Care Reform, we welcome her to the 21st century.

Edited by daniel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We already know what a failure the capitalists' attempt at low-income housing has turned out - a world wide recession. In comparison, socialistic Canada with its highly regulated banking system and universal health care is still doing alright.

Sure it is...the frinking capital comes from other nations, especially the United States!

As America passes Health Care Reform, we welcome her to the 21st century.

..and we welcome Canada to our stock portfolios.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the Reverend Al Sharpton the American people voted for Socialism when they voted for Barack Obama.

So American has found more "universal value" to share with Canadian.....isn't it good for harmonious neighbourhood....? :P

Didn't Barack try and distance himself from socialism?

There is a joke.(Acually it is a Chinese political joke with a bit of modification.)

After his inauguration ceremony, tired and exhausted, Obama slumped in the backseat of his presidential limousine.

"Where would you like to go, Mr.President?", the driver asked.

"Just turn left." Obama answered.

"Are you sure?", the driver was surprised, "there is a traffic sign named 'public opinion' with right turn symbol on it over there. Every president who was in my car before had to obey this signal regardless what he said to his voters in the election because the signpost has a sensor called media on it. If I turn on the left turn signal light the sensor will know and the president will be in trouble."

"Oh, I see....", the president blinked, "but it's no problem. You just need to turn on the right-turn signal light and then make a left turn....." :lol:

Edited by xul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure it is...the frinking capital comes from other nations, especially the United States!

..and we welcome Canada to our stock portfolios.

Canada and the U.S. are each others biggest trading partners. Logic says that a U.S. economic pooper would affect Canada the most. And its not like the economy in southern Ontario hasn't been ravaged by the U.S. car industry crisis. :rolleyes:

Canada has a better banking system than the U.S., and most of the rest of the world for that matter. Deal with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada and the U.S. are each others biggest trading partners. Logic says that a U.S. economic pooper would affect Canada the most. And its not like the economy in southern Ontario hasn't been ravaged by the U.S. car industry crisis. :rolleyes:

Right..it's the US car industry...the US market that drives that industry in Norte America...not Canada.

Canada has a better banking system than the U.S., and most of the rest of the world for that matter. Deal with it.

And the resulting lack of capital has forced Canada to beg for foreign investment over many years, only to hear bitching and moaning about foreign ownership. Deal with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America is such a mess. I was listening to two guys who were Republicans, and they were saying OK watch out America is going socialist and we are going to see our taxes go back up to 70-80% because of the health care. Guys, America's debt was out of control BEFORE Obama got to the White House. Where were the "tea partiers" when US invaded Hussein and the truth came out about the lies told? America has nothing to show for all the money spend on the Iraq war, just reminders of all the injured and dead. These guys went on about the elections in Novemeber and how the people need to vote out ALL that voted for the healthcare package. So in other words , vote out the Dems and put back the Republicans, back and forth back and forth. The US really NEEDS a third party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America is such a mess. I was listening to two guys who were Republicans, and they were saying OK watch out America is going socialist and we are going to see our taxes go back up to 70-80% because of the health care. Guys, America's debt was out of control BEFORE Obama got to the White House.

OK...so how did Obama help out on that front?

Where were the "tea partiers" when US invaded Hussein and the truth came out about the lies told? America has nothing to show for all the money spend on the Iraq war, just reminders of all the injured and dead.

They were getting George W. Bush re-elected. America has plenty to show for its efforts...ding dong Saddam is dead.

These guys went on about the elections in Novemeber and how the people need to vote out ALL that voted for the healthcare package. So in other words , vote out the Dems and put back the Republicans, back and forth back and forth. The US really NEEDS a third party.

The US already has third parties....far more than Canada. How's that working out for ya?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

America is such a mess. I was listening to two guys who were Republicans, and they were saying OK watch out America is going socialist and we are going to see our taxes go back up to 70-80% because of the health care. Guys, America's debt was out of control BEFORE Obama got to the White House.

So Obama is just continuing along with the increasing debt program?

I agree, Bush spent too freely. Especially after 2006 when Democrats gained control of the Senate and the Congress.

Where were the "tea partiers" when US invaded Hussein and the truth came out about the lies told?

Yeah, I remember Hillary and Bill and John Kerry lying about those WMDs.

I think the best intelligence information told them there were WMDs. If we forgive Hillary and Bill and John we will have to forgive George too.

America has nothing to show for all the money spend on the Iraq war, just reminders of all the injured and dead. These guys went on about the elections in Novemeber and how the people need to vote out ALL that voted for the healthcare package. So in other words , vote out the Dems and put back the Republicans, back and forth back and forth. The US really NEEDS a third party.

Yeah. Just like Canada where you can tell where most of the hard core socialists are.

In the States they seem to hide in the Democrat Party - they will have to change their name to the New Democrat Party and create the Tea party, right? The Republicans will be the new liberals and the tea party will be the new conservatives. Sounds like a plan!

You forget there are more than three parties in Canada. There is the Communist party, The Marxist-Leninist party, the Libertarian party, the Green party, and I think a few others. As BC points out there are other parties in the US as well.

Edited by Pliny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's accurate to describe Obama as a socialist. As far as I know, "socialism" is a somewhat subjective term. To me, a true socialist advocates large-scale nationalization, beyond simply broad-ranging government intervention into the market. Obama is certainly to the right of Jack Layton, so if Obama is a socialist (which he isn't), what does that make Jack Layton? Supporting a socialistic policy in one dimension, i.e. single-payer healthcare that apparently Obama supported way-back-when, doesn't make someone a full-blown socialist.

Edited by Gabriel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's accurate to describe Obama as a socialist. As far as I know, "socialism" is a somewhat subjective term. To me, a true socialist advocates large-scale nationalization, beyond simply broad-ranging government intervention into the market. Obama is certainly to the right of Jack Layton, so if Obama is a socialist (which he isn't), what does that make Jack Layton? Supporting a socialistic policy in one dimension, i.e. single-payer healthcare that apparently Obama supported way-back-when, doesn't make someone a full-blown socialist.

Gabriel, you're speaking with somebody who is basically a Libertarian.

As far as right-of-center voters go, Libertarians distinguish themselves with their reasoned approach, excellent arguments, and their categorization of any government that spends on anything beyond roads and military to be socialistic.

I enjoy debating with them, myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gabriel, you're speaking with somebody who is basically a Libertarian.

As far as right-of-center voters go, Libertarians distinguish themselves with their reasoned approach, excellent arguments, and their categorization of any government that spends on anything beyond roads and military to be socialistic.

I enjoy debating with them, myself.

You're referring to Topaz? I think I flirted with Libertarian philosophy at one point, but I find it (and other ideologies) to be too ideological (wow, how much more obvious of an observation can I make?).

being a Libertarian, though, shouldn't lead one to describe people like Obama as socialistic. Hugo Chavez could be described as a socialist, so how can we even put Obama in the same category? Obama doesn't have some sort of ideological resentment towards economic liberties and free markets in the general sense, and he doesn't advocate widespread nationalization and broad government interventions into the economy. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir, though - I think you and I are of the same mind on the matter of what is and what isn't socialism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they are moving in that direction... moderate socialism.

"Socialism, in the hands of a wise man, is medicine. In the hands of a fool, poison." - Sir Bandelot

No matter was adjective you want to put in front of it (i.e. "moderate), I think it's just inaccurate to describe Obama as a socialist. I wouldn't even give him the label "diet socialist".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess that's you then.

700 billion dollar bailouts could prove you wrong...

If you're talking about the banks, they've repaid most (or all?) of that money. But ya, the "stimulus" bill is another thing, altogether. But Bush did it, too.... can he be described as a socialist of one flavour or another?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,750
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Betsy Smith
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...