Who belives President Obama is a Socialist?

Damocles said:
Any decent debater can take any side of a position and argue it well. So far I have three people trying to say, "It isn't perfect USSR/Cuba style socialism so nobody can ever call anything Socialism unless it is there!"

I simply work to point out a different POV to you, as to why a reasonable person coming from a different perspective can see "socialism" in somebody who seems to believe that the government is the only solution to every problem.
Click to expand...

The only solution to every problem? There is what's referred to as balancing or weighing the evidence. As I stated previously it's just as absurd to say Obama is a socialist because he is for implementing a few social policies as it is to say the leaders of Cuba and China are capitalists because they allow village elections.
 
Damocles said:
Every President since Roosevelt did not promote a government-owned and run Single Payer system for 6% of our GDP. I think pretending that they did because you want to dismiss their concerns is stupid. It isn't reasonable to pretend that there is no such thing as incrementalism.

Although I think such dismissals have actually served to draw attention to these concerns. There is a reason that 67% of the US wants this program repealed and replaced. It isn't because everybody agrees with you.
Click to expand...

People want it repealed or replaced because of the lies and propaganda they have been fed.

Not one country has repealed or replaced their government run/supervised health care. Not one country out of dozens.

The problem is Obama had to compromise resulting in a less than perfect plan. The anti-plan folks are comprised of two groups. One wanting no plan and one wanting a more comprehensive plan although some folks like to group them together as not wanting any plan.

As the plan takes effect and adjustments are made after being demanded by the citizens the same thing is going to happen as happened in every other country. Government run/supervised medical will be here to stay.
 
apple0154 said:
People want it repealed or replaced because of the lies and propaganda they have been fed.

Not one country has repealed or replaced their government run/supervised health care. Not one country out of dozens.

The problem is Obama had to compromise resulting in a less than perfect plan. The anti-plan folks are comprised of two groups. One wanting no plan and one wanting a more comprehensive plan although some folks like to group them together as not wanting any plan.

As the plan takes effect and adjustments are made after being demanded by the citizens the same thing is going to happen as happened in every other country. Government run/supervised medical will be here to stay.
Click to expand...

Quite irrelevant, pinhead...repealing any social program is impossible....you can't get toothpaste back into the tube either....its got nothing to due with if its good for the country or not.....no government will allow its citizens to repeal any government takeover....
What is relevant is the fact that the majority of US citizens didn't clamor FOR socialized medicine in the first place.... its being forced on them by the Socialists in power .... and once it takes hold, it will be impossible to get rid of.....
 
bravo said:
Quite irrelevant, pinhead...repealing any social program is impossible....you can't get toothpaste back into the tube either....its got nothing to due with if its good for the country or not.....no government will allow its citizens to repeal any government takeover....
Click to expand...

Utter nonsense. Find one political party, in any country that has government medical, which has campaigned on repealing it? If it was the wishes of the citizens politicians would be jumping on it just to get elected.

What is relevant is the fact that the majority of US citizens didn't clamor FOR socialized medicine in the first place.... its being forced on them by the Socialists in power .... and once it takes hold, it will be impossible to get rid of.....
Click to expand...

The majority wanted change. Again, all the lies and distortions about "socialized medicine" has caused many to object to it, however, that will change as policies go into effect and citizens receive the benefits.

The only reason it will be impossible to get rid of it is because the citizens won't want to get rid of it. Just like the citizens in every country, without exception, have fought to maintain their "socialized medicine".
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Certainly Canada's health care system is socialised. Does that mean Canada is a socialist nation?

This demonization of socialism is a canard. Granted, I'd rather live in a chosen purgatory then an obligatory paradise so there's no way in hell do I want to live in a nation governed completely by socialism (i.e. communism). But there is a time and a place in our nation for socialized institutions and the US has shown that when it is cost affective and in the best interest of the general public to adopt these systems, we have done so. Our nations educational system comes to mind as an example and keep in mind, much of our health care system, particularly our hospitals, are all ready socialized. Does that make the US a socialist nation? Hardly.

Does that mean I want to see the US Health care system socialized like Canada's? No, but I do want to see our system modernized to reduce cost and improve outcomes by adopting universal coverage, a single payer system and price controls as the other wealthy modern industrialized nations have done. These are the three elements all these wealthy industrial nations have in common with each others health care systems, except for the US, have adopted to reduce cost and help improve outcomes.
Click to expand...
None of this would change the belief of many people who think he wants to incrementally change our economy to a more socialized economy. In reality it isn't impossible to see it from that perspective. I would point out that socialism in today's usage can mean even partially socialized economies. When you believe that taking that path at all is bad, it isn't unrealistic to warn against it by pointing out where you believe that policy will lead and calling the people who want to take you there "socialist"..
 
apple0154 said:
People want it repealed or replaced because of the lies and propaganda they have been fed.

Not one country has repealed or replaced their government run/supervised health care. Not one country out of dozens.

The problem is Obama had to compromise resulting in a less than perfect plan. The anti-plan folks are comprised of two groups. One wanting no plan and one wanting a more comprehensive plan although some folks like to group them together as not wanting any plan.

As the plan takes effect and adjustments are made after being demanded by the citizens the same thing is going to happen as happened in every other country. Government run/supervised medical will be here to stay.
Click to expand...
People want it repealed and replaced because it is bad legislation and its constitutionality is in question. Even the people who passed it know that it is at best questionable...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704446704575206502199257916.html

There is a reason they suddenly want to try to redefine what they passed.
 
" I would point out that socialism in today's usage can mean even partially socialized economies"

Damo - if that is your belief, than you are allowing the extremists to change the meaning of the word for you.

If that is the case, America is a socialist country today, and we have been for the better part of the past century.

To me, we are not, because I respect the actual meaning of the word "socialism," and realize that we are still a capitalistic society, despite programs like SS & Medicare.
 
apple0154 said:
The only solution to every problem? There is what's referred to as balancing or weighing the evidence. As I stated previously it's just as absurd to say Obama is a socialist because he is for implementing a few social policies as it is to say the leaders of Cuba and China are capitalists because they allow village elections.
Click to expand...
However, when the man himself says that his goal is to work towards socialistic programs incrementally, there will be an element of people who will take him at his word.
 
Damocles said:
However, when the man himself says that his goal is to work towards socialistic programs incrementally, there will be an element of people who will take him at his word.
Click to expand...

Goin' round and round with the pinheads is some fun, huh?

The pinhead is right in saying, "....it's just as absurd to say Obama is a socialist because he is for implementing a few social policies...."

Thats true and its irrelevant....
a few Social Programs and government sponsored charity in modest amounts do not automatically make a country a "Socialist" country or its president a "socialist" president.....so enough with the strawman bullshit already....

Obama IS A SOCIALIST
1. because of his belief that "redistribution of wealth" is the governments duty and a moral personal goal....
2. because of his goal of incremental government takeover of sectors of the economy, a piece at a time....banking, auto manufacturing, medicine, education, etc.....
3. because he has shown disregard of the Constitution as written and interpreted by the Courts...Freedom of speech and religion, freedom to bear arms, freedom of association,
 
bravo said:
Obama IS A SOCIALIST
1. because of his belief that "redistribution of wealth" is the governments duty and a moral personal goal....
2. because of his goal of incremental government takeover of sectors of the economy, a piece at a time....banking, auto manufacturing, medicine, education, etc.....
3. because he has shown disregard of the Constitution as written and interpreted by the Courts...Freedom of speech and religion, freedom to bear arms, freedom of association,
Click to expand...

There is no government takeover the kind of which is normally associated with Socialism. That's when governments nationalize companies similar to what happened in Venezuela. Certain private ownership is forbidden.

In Obama's case the companies were bankrupt. Private ownership wasn't forbidden. Banking, the auto industry, etc. were not nationalized. The businesses were failing and the government helped them out.

This is the perfect example where people deliberately confuse the two, equate them, then say, Socialism. Socialism is associated with restrictions. If anything, the bailout was the opposite. It encouraged maintaining private ownership by loaning the troubled companies money.

Numbers 1 & 3 cover an extremely wide scope. Any and all government programs/projects which benefit people without requiring a direct pay-per-use can be considered "redistribution of wealth". For example, a national park charging an entrance fee per car, regardless of the number of passengers, can be considered a socialist policy, although I doubt many people think of national park admission when hearing the word "Socialism."

Is one to consider prohibiting the carrying of weapons in schools to be infringing on the freedom to bear arms?

This socialism nonsense is nothing but fear mongering. As I noted Obama's policies have as much to do with socialism as China's village elections have to do with democracy and freedom.
 
Just witnessing the fact that this thread has now extended to 9 pages has caused me to shed a little tear over the corpse of intelligent thought.

May God have mercy on your soul.
 
bravo said:
Goin' round and round with the pinheads is some fun, huh?

The pinhead is right in saying, "....it's just as absurd to say Obama is a socialist because he is for implementing a few social policies...."

Thats true and its irrelevant....
a few Social Programs and government sponsored charity in modest amounts do not automatically make a country a "Socialist" country or its president a "socialist" president.....so enough with the strawman bullshit already....

Obama IS A SOCIALIST
1. because of his belief that "redistribution of wealth" is the governments duty and a moral personal goal....
2. because of his goal of incremental government takeover of sectors of the economy, a piece at a time....banking, auto manufacturing, medicine, education, etc.....
3. because he has shown disregard of the Constitution as written and interpreted by the Courts...Freedom of speech and religion, freedom to bear arms, freedom of association,
Click to expand...

How comes you can always tell the presence of a wingnut by the smell of burning straw?

Well let's see by using you're logic you right wingers and your leaders Bush and Limbaugh are fascist because.

#1. Your fervent and insistent pursuit of nationalism.
#2. Your disdain for the importance of human rights.
#3. You identify enemies and scapegoats (i.e. liberals) as a unifying cause.
#4. Your avid militarism.
#5. Your control of the media to distribute your propaganda (i.e. Fox news, right wing radio.).
#6. Your obsession with national security. You react to poor Mexicans coming here for jobs like an invasion of the Mongol hordes.
#7. The alliance of the two reactionary forces, religious fundamentalist and big business. This is particularly obvious in anti-science clique.
#8. You protect the power of corporations at the expense of the vast majority of citizens as evidenced by your opposition to regulating Wall Street after they crashed our economy.
#9. Suppressing or eliminating the influence of labor unions. This one scares you cause it's the one center of power that can truly challenge your political elite.
#10. Your disdain and oppression of intellectuals and the arts.
#11. Your obsession with crime and punishment. How you want to give police unchecked powers at the cost of our rights.
#12. Rampant cronyism and corruption. No bid contracts to KBR and "Your doing a hell of a job Brownie" comes to mind.

and unlike your attributes of socialism you peg on Obama, these are actually true!

So the facts are, you wingnuts and neocons of the reactionary right are far closer to fascism then then the left is remotely to socialism and it's why the American people have rejected you as a politcal force. Or should I say farce?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
How comes you can always tell the presence of a wingnut by the smell of burning straw?

Well let's see by using you're logic you right wingers and your leaders Bush and Limbaugh are fascist because.

#1. Your fervent and insistent pursuit of nationalism.
#2. Your disdain for the importance of human rights.
#3. You identify enemies and scapegoats (i.e. liberals) as a unifying cause.
#4. Your avid militarism.
#5. Your control of the media to distribute your propaganda (i.e. Fox news, right wing radio.).
#6. Your obsession with national security. You react to poor Mexicans coming here for jobs like an invasion of the Mongol hordes.
#7. The alliance of the two reactionary forces, religious fundamentalist and big business. This is particularly obvious in anti-science clique.
#8. You protect the power of corporations at the expense of the vast majority of citizens as evidenced by your opposition to regulating Wall Street after they crashed our economy.
#9. Suppressing or eliminating the influence of labor unions. This one scares you cause it's the one center of power that can truly challenge your political elite.
#10. Your disdain and oppression of intellectuals and the arts.
#11. Your obsession with crime and punishment. How you want to give police unchecked powers at the cost of our rights.
#12. Rampant cronyism and corruption. No bid contracts to KBR and "Your doing a hell of a job Brownie" comes to mind.

and unlike your attributes of socialism you peg on Obama, these are actually true!

So the facts are, you wingnuts and neocons of the reactionary right are far closer to fascism then then the left is remotely to socialism and it's why the American people have rejected you as a politcal force. Or should I say farce?
Click to expand...

Lets not change the subject every time you get pwned with facts...

the subject is Obama the president, not Limbaugh, the entertainer.

:321:

The socialism we accuse Obama of is directly from his own actions and his own lips....."spread the wealth", "redistribute the wealth", socialized medicine, gov. takeover of GM, etc....
 
Last edited:
bravo said:
Lets not change the subject every time you get pwned with facts...

the subject is Obama the president, not Limbaugh, the entertainer.

:321:

The socialism we accuse Obama of is directly from his own actions and his own lips....."spread the wealth", "redistribute the wealth", socialized medicine, gov. takeover of GM, etc....
Click to expand...

You are a racist.
 
apple0154 said:
There is no government takeover the kind of which is normally associated with Socialism. That's when governments nationalize companies similar to what happened in Venezuela. Certain private ownership is forbidden.

Venezuela does it their way
Nazi Germany did it their way
USSR tried it their way
Cuba tried it their way
All of which has nothing to do with the US...Obama will try it his way

In Obama's case the companies were bankrupt. Private ownership wasn't forbidden. Banking, the auto industry, etc. were not nationalized. The businesses were failing and the government helped them out.

Government TOOK THEM OVER....period
divvied up the ownership to their supporters (UAW), etc.
It ain't Chavez's way, its Obamas way....

This is the perfect example where people deliberately confuse the two, equate them, then say, Socialism. Socialism is associated with restrictions. If anything, the bailout was the opposite. It encouraged maintaining private ownership by loaning the troubled companies money.

Socialism is assiciated with "redistributing wealth"....confiscating goods from the haves and giving to the have-nots, sharing the poverty

Numbers 1 & 3 cover an extremely wide scope. Any and all government programs/projects which benefit people without requiring a direct pay-per-use can be considered "redistribution of wealth". For example, a national park charging an entrance fee per car, regardless of the number of passengers, can be considered a socialist policy, although I doubt many people think of national park admission when hearing the word "Socialism."

Building infrastructure isn't "redistributing wealth"
Government sponsored education isn't "redistributing wealth"
The VA and Medicare isn't "redistributing wealth"
The Nations defense isn't "redistributing wealth"
the progressive tax system IS "redistributing wealth"


Is one to consider prohibiting the carrying of weapons in schools to be infringing on the freedom to bear arms?

If you disagree with the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, change it,....just don't fuckin' ignore it...


This socialism nonsense is nothing but fear mongering. As I noted Obama's policies have as much to do with socialism as China's village elections have to do with democracy and freedom.
Click to expand...

We don't fear socialism, we just don't want it....face the facts...
Obama IS a socialist, just like a majority of his Administration to one degree or another..., as many have admitted, some inadvertently, some right up front.....just like
Bernie Sanders ....at least he fuckin' admits it

You don't have to be a florist to smell the roses.
 
Last edited:
bravo said:
Lets not change the subject every time you get pwned with facts...

the subject is Obama the president, not Limbaugh, the entertainer.

:321:

The socialism we accuse Obama of is directly from his own actions and his own lips....."spread the wealth", "redistribute the wealth", socialized medicine, gov. takeover of GM, etc....
Click to expand...
Javol, ich bin einen der Republikaner!

I figured if I challenged your comments which weren't even remotely close to being true by showing you your true reflection you wouldn't be able to handle it.

Look, the greatest generation our nation ever produced sacrificed their blood and lives to rid the world of the menace of you fascist. So considering who you really are, your false cries of "socialism" pretty much falls on deaf ears. You authoritarians are a far greater menace to this nation and the world then any left leaning politician in this country could possibly be. You've pretty much destroyed the Republican party. What more do you want? I...I know, concentration camps.
 
charver said:
Just witnessing the fact that this thread has now extended to 9 pages has caused me to shed a little tear over the corpse of intelligent thought.

May God have mercy on your soul.
Click to expand...
Well as H.L. Mencken said about conservatives in this nation "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top