Now He's Not A Socialist... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


puella -> Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 9:33:17 PM)

So, do you retract your statements of Obama being a socialist when the man and candidate who invoked those words and ideas about Obama admits that he is, in fact, NOT a socialist?  And if McCain knew all along that Obama is not a socialist, why has he spread that idea among his followers?  Why retract the statement now?    It seems pretty Rovian... say what ever falsehood you want...just get it out there, and then, after everyone is repeating the falsehood for you, step away.

Not very nice!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2ZGnM2oku8&eurl=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/30/obama-not-a-socialist-mcc_n_139294.html



KING: You don't believe Barack Obama is a socialist, do you?

MCCAIN: No. But, I do believe -- I do believe that he's been in the far left of American politics. He has stated time after time that he believes in "spreading the wealth around." He's talked about courts that would redistribute the wealth.

He has a record of voting against tax cuts and for tax increases. And I don't think there's any doubt that he would increase spending and he would, sooner or later, we would be increasing taxes. There is no doubt in my mind that that's what his record -- 94 times he voted to cut taxes -- against tax cuts and for tax increases. He voted for -- and that's what matters. Not rhetoric. To raise taxes on individuals making $42,000 a year.

KING: Concerning spreading the wealth, isn't the graduated income tax spreading the wealth? If you and I paid more so that Jimmy can get some for him, or pay for a welfare recipient, that's spreading the wealth.

MCCAIN: Well, that's spreading the wealth in the respect that we do have a graduated income tax. That's a far cry from taking from one group of Americans and giving to another. I mean, that's dramatically different.

Sen. Obama clearly has talked about for years, redistributive policies. And that's not the way we create wealth in America. That's not the way we grow our economy. That's not the way we create jobs.  And when small business people see that half of their income, half of the income of small businesses is going to be taxed by Sen, Obama, then they're very upset with it.

KING: He says, it's only the personal income tax. If you run a store, if you make $250,000 or more, as a personal income, not a business income, that's where he's (INAUDIBLE).

MCCAIN: And that's where his folks just reduced it to $200,000. And then Sen. Biden yesterday said $150,000. And the fact is that if Joe the Plumber is able to buy the business that he works in, the guy that he buys it from is going to see an increase in capital gains taxes. They're going to see an increase in payroll taxes. They're going to see -- if he reaches a certain level, an increase in his income taxes. And that's what got people concerned. That's what's got Joe the Plumber upset. He wants to redistribute the money.

KING: Doesn't taxes pay for services?

MCCAIN: Taxes pay for services.

KING: (INAUDIBLE) taxes.

MCCAIN: But, do we want -- taxes pay to keep our government secure. To help those who can't help themselves. And other functions of government, which, by the way, expanded by some 40 percent in the last eight years and gave us a $10 trillion debt --

KING: Under Bush.

MCCAIN: And to the last two years, under Democrat majorities in the House and Senate.

But, that's the job of government. But it is not the job of government that I believe in, that would take a group of Americans who have some money and say, we're taking your money, and we're giving it to others. This 95 percent tax cut he's talking about for 95 percent of Americans -- 40 percent of Americans pay no income tax. So he is just going to give them some money. Where is he going to get it? He is increasing taxes for other groups of Americans. That's his plan.

KING: What are you going to do?

MCCAIN: I'm going to keep taxes low. I'm going to ...

KING: Where they are?

MCCAIN: Sure. Absolutely






popeye1250 -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 9:50:00 PM)

Puella, Obama is a "global socialist."
Have you read his Bill S-2433?
He wants to take $675B of the Taxpayer's money and hand it over to the "U.N." to, get this,...."aleviate world poverty."
If that isn't a "socialist" I really don't know what would be.
Funny, all the Obama kiss asses keep yelling at us; "He's not a socialist! He's not a socialist!"
Right!
I bet most of them would lick his balls if they had the chance.
The one who smelt it dealt it.




corysub -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 9:56:08 PM)

I think McCain answered Larry King's question correctly.  Obama is to the left of socialism.  You could be extreme right or left and still be a socialist....from communist to nazi.  
For the sake of clarity, maybe Larry should have rephrased the question...dontacha think?   :)




MadAxeman -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 10:46:42 PM)

Wanting to alleviate world hunger is not a definition of socialism.
Socialism is a dirty word in America and seems to translate into 'Anti American, bring down the country, tree hugging, minority tolerant, weak minded, financially naive, workshy, double talking ramblers'.
Here in the U.K sadly some of that has been introduced into our culture. New Labour never mention it, but both the main parties hold up our healthcare system (NHS) as a paragon of the mixed economy. That came into being when 'socialism' meant looking after the weaker members of society. To call Obama a socialist is regarded as ridiculous here, but it's all relative. Perhaps he just has an inkling that the U.S economy is not an ideal model.




Hippiekinkster -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 10:49:47 PM)

Listen to that fucking moron...
"MCCAIN: Well, that's spreading the wealth in the respect that we do have a graduated income tax. That's a far cry from taking from one group of Americans and giving to another. I mean, that's dramatically different."

Is he really that stupid? Never mind. Rhetorical question. 




popeye1250 -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 10:50:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadAxeman

Wanting to alleviate world hunger is not a definition of socialism.
Socialism is a dirty word in America and seems to translate into 'Anti American, bring down the country, tree hugging, minority tolerant, weak minded, financially naive, workshy, double talking ramblers'.
Here in the U.K sadly some of that has been introduced into our culture. New Labour never mention it, but both the main parties hold up our healthcare system (NHS) as a paragon of the mixed economy. That came into being when 'socialism' meant looking after the weaker members of society. To call Obama a socialist is regarded as ridiculous here, but it's all relative. Perhaps he just has an inkling that the U.S economy is not an ideal model.


Madaxeman, it is a definition of socialism when you want to do it with *someone else's money.*
"A socialist will give you the shirt off of someone else's back."




Arpig -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 10:51:19 PM)

Obama is NOT a socialist...Jack Layton is a socialist (and admits it).




Hippiekinkster -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 10:56:37 PM)

I'm a Free market Capitalist, myself. I want to take Popeye's money and give it to some very rich people who ran a scam on the government for over 8 years.

THEY ARE WORTHY! THEY ARE WORTHY!




TheHeretic -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 11:03:46 PM)

     To the OP;

      I'm not retracting a thing, Puella.  I didn't start refering to Obama as a darn socialist because I got a talking points email on the subject.  I'm not going to stop because it puts me in conflict with Johnny's latest one.

     My perception of Senator Obama's worldview is that he prefers the path on the left.  More government intervention in the lives and pockets of the citizenry.  More welfare (see the Saddleback Forum), more taxes (it seems we are down quite a bit on the definition of 'rich'), and a 'government is the answer' ideology.

        Look at where he started, and hung around for so long.  He may have denounced Bill Ayers actions, but he still chose to begin his political career with a meet and greet in the living room of a famously radical leftist.  He may have tossed Reverend Wright under the bus, but he still spent 20 years in a church that preached a lot of hate.  How much money did he throw to ACORN during the primaries?

       I call him a darn socialist because I think leftist ideology and methodology are pretty much his default positions.  Should I call him a greedhead capitalist instead?




MadAxeman -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 11:10:50 PM)

Idealism does not directly equate to socialism.
Lack of proper control has brought the world to the brink of financial collapse. How this is still denied, I find somewhat baffling.




TheHeretic -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 11:25:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadAxeman
Lack of proper control has brought the world to the brink of financial collapse.



          Or well intentioned meddling.  Depends on one's point of view. 




GreedyTop -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/30/2008 11:41:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadAxeman

Wanting to alleviate world hunger is not a definition of socialism.
Socialism is a dirty word in America and seems to translate into 'Anti American, bring down the country, tree hugging, minority tolerant, weak minded, financially naive, workshy, double talking ramblers'.
Here in the U.K sadly some of that has been introduced into our culture. New Labour never mention it, but both the main parties hold up our healthcare system (NHS) as a paragon of the mixed economy. That came into being when 'socialism' meant looking after the weaker members of society. To call Obama a socialist is regarded as ridiculous here, but it's all relative. Perhaps he just has an inkling that the U.S economy is not an ideal model.


Madaxeman, it is a definition of socialism when you want to do it with *someone else's money.*
"A socialist will give you the shirt off of someone else's back."


I am the first to admit I am not the most politically astute soul in the US...

But I always understood that paying taxes was how US citizens contributed to teh 'greater good' of the country..including helping to care for those who were for whatever reason not in a position to contribute at the time...

And because of our position in the world economy (which I admit is more than a bit shaky right now), our taxes also go to help in places outside our borders.

While I think more emphasis should be placed on working on whats going on INSIDE our borders, I personally have no issue with putting our collective money where our (generic, folks) mouths are, and try to help others outside our borders.

*shrug*




MadAxeman -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/31/2008 12:03:55 AM)

Astute enough




GreedyTop -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/31/2008 12:30:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadAxeman

Astute enough


*smooch*

I miss my Dad.. he and I would have chats about politics, and he could (and DID) argue all sides.. he always helped me clarify my thoughts on the issues at hand.. *sigh*




MadAxeman -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/31/2008 12:34:35 AM)

Mine too GT.
Right back atcha




SilverMark -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/31/2008 2:59:52 AM)

Agreed Greedy, My father although at heart he would agree would take the other side just see how dep my thoughts were.....then go into his attorney mode and disect them to the point I would start to question them....
then come full circle just to make me think of all things invovled....Dads are pretty important!




slvemike4u -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/31/2008 4:20:57 AM)

Heretic,in answer to your what "should I call him"question,I suggest POTUS come Jan.20...it is short easy to type and has a certain gravitas,does it not ?
In your second post here you suggested there was a point of view that well-intended meddling was responsible for the current economic crisis,care to explain this to me.Did any of this "meddling"come in the form of oversight/regulation's ?




puella -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/31/2008 7:10:46 AM)

Heya popeye,

UN aid money is not a new thing for the US or most of the other democracies.  We are one of the lowest donors, btw... 
http://www.poverty.com/internationalaid.html

Even Reagan agreed to (and employed) the importance of foreign aid, not only to combat poverty but as a 'weapon' in the cold war.

But even so.. socialism is really more of a domestic issue, not a foreign policy:

so·cial·ism


1.a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

and just for kicks, and probably more germain to the entire argument set out by Palin and McCain to begin with:

Main Entry:  
democratic socialism

Definition:  

a form of socialism with a democratic government; the ownership and control of the means of production, capital, land, property, etc., by the community as a whole -- combined with a democratic government




At any rate, this is sort of a side track and doesn't much address the entire issue of my OP which was , essentially WHY call Obama a socialist if you know very well, and are later willing to admit (after the smears have had their effect on the uninformed or unwilling to be informed) that it is not true?




RealityLicks -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/31/2008 7:18:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

I bet most of them would lick his balls if they had the chance.


So you foresee a Monica Lewinsky moment here?

Seriously, people licking each others balls is surely some kind of perversion isn't it?  Shouldn't be allowed...

quote:


The one who smelt it dealt it.


Quite.... parp!




twistedreality -> RE: Now He's Not A Socialist... (10/31/2008 7:25:23 AM)

The redistribution of wealth is straight from Marx!




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125