1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Is Barack Obama a Socialist?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by gauharjk, Mar 29, 2008.

  1. #1
    Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist... a conservative... champion of the constitution...

    But he is not really gonna be nominated. Americans have started to believe in "Redistribution of Wealth" from "the Rich to the Poor", as if the rich guys would allow it to happen.

    The rich people have many different types of loopholes, via which, they would still pay the least tax, Robert Kiyosaki has written about it many times...

    But you visit sites like DailyKos, and you'll know it is a Socialist Stronghold. The ideas of individual liberty, and economic liberty, and stuff like that has not really impressed those guys.

    So, now, IMHO, Barack Obama would be the best candidate to be supported.

    You know, when you look at Clinton, and hear her speak, you have a feeling there is something terribly evil about her. She is a die-hard commu...errr.. socialist.

    And McCain, he doesn't know what he's dong. He'll be controlled by the neocons, the same way Bush was used by them.

    So, the only choice now is Barack Obama. By his speeches, he sounds sincere, and intelligent. He is an opportunist, but he wants to bring the country together, and end the influence of lobbyists and SIGs in Washington.

    He is not really a socialist, but a populist, trying to please his voters, and telling them what they want to hear.

    That is why, it is my opinion, that Barack Obama should be supported, because the alternatives are Hitlary Clinton and Insane McCain...
     
    gauharjk, Mar 29, 2008 IP
  2. skyraider

    skyraider Peon

    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    Barack Obama is not going to bring the country together. He's going to divide us by race and class with certain govn't programs, and he's going to train-wreck the economy with tax hikes (tax hikes to get us out of a recession? what?)

    But he is not really a socialist outside of his policies on healthcare. A socialist believes in government control of the means of production. He is indeed a populist who believes in redistribution of wealth and other old, ineffective monetary policies. So why support Obama just because he has a following? Support the candidate who you think is best.
     
    skyraider, Mar 29, 2008 IP
  3. browntwn

    browntwn Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    8,347
    Likes Received:
    848
    Best Answers:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    435
    #3
    Barack Obama is a Democrat.
     
    browntwn, Mar 29, 2008 IP
  4. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,926
    Likes Received:
    270
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #4
    This is a typical reply from someone who is racially blinded for the majority of their life. Where did he ever talk about tax hikes to get us out of a recession? How will he train wreck the economy? How will he divide us with these so called goverment programs your talking about?

    Sheep in wolves clothing...
     
    astup1didiot, Mar 29, 2008 IP
  5. pingpong123

    pingpong123 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,080
    Likes Received:
    117
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    175
    #5
    ObaMA like the other stooges recieved massive funding from the big special interest groups. He will be in their side pockets and doing whatever the heck they want him to do. He will be a good boy for the elite . We had Ron Paul and all americans should have rallied together behind the only candidate that was his own man and not supported by anyone but the people, but the fire has been lite. The strict consitutionalist republicans and libertarians wont go away.
     
    pingpong123, Mar 29, 2008 IP
  6. gauharjk

    gauharjk Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,430
    Likes Received:
    135
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    230
    #6
    I had a shocking experience on DailyKos... Those guys hate Dr. Ron Paul. These are people who believe they deserve government handouts, they deserve free healthcare, they want more axes for the rich...

    But I still believe Barack Obama is not Hitlary Clinon... There is a real difference, like, Clinon is an expert liar, but Obama sounds sincere... You know, how he handled the racial issue of Rev. Wright by directly confronting it, and opening his hear out to he world...

    He has certainly received donations from special income groups... But he is an opportunist. You cannot expect another Ron Paul or Allan Keyes. If you live in a lake, you cannot afford enmity with the crocodile.
     
    gauharjk, Mar 29, 2008 IP
  7. skyraider

    skyraider Peon

    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    Obama on taxes: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Obama_talks_capgains_rate_with_CNBC.html

    Just because someone does not support Obama does not mean that that person is "racially blind" - whatever that means! An anti-affirmative-action stance, for example, does not make a person "racially blind." That particular stance would indicate a disagreement on how to best lift poverty-stricken minority communities out of poverty.

    The cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions, I think, will contribute to the wrecking of the economy. That's because it'll take dollars out of the economy, via income taxes or another form of taxes, and "invest" them into inefficient energy forms that are only exist because of subsidies (see the above article - Obama wants to do this). Let technology progress, and these things will come. For now, let's look to nuclear power for our energy.

    Unfortunately, none of the candidates are vehemently opposed to inefficient energy sources. Obama even supports corn ethanol!

    Let's have a discourse on policy without the ad hominem stuff, especially if it's unbased, ok? :)
     
    skyraider, Mar 29, 2008 IP
  8. unlockediphonesite.com

    unlockediphonesite.com Active Member

    Messages:
    294
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #8

    Obama may sound sincere but he still lied, I think that its almost impossible to be a member of a church and dont believe and NEVER??? heard what the pastor said. Clinton and Obama both lie!

    I like Ron Paul, but besides the fact that he doesnt have a chance, hes too weak on terror. I do agree with him on many issues though.

    Another thing, I dont see how Obama could sit there and listen to what his pastor said about his white mama. Obama is mixed, NOT black.
     
    unlockediphonesite.com, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  9. guerilla

    guerilla Notable Member

    Messages:
    9,066
    Likes Received:
    262
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #9
    Brother, I will miss you. You're in the "Obama Zone" now. When he speaks, it's hypnotic. All of a sudden, it doesn't matter if he's saying nothing, or that he contradicts himself, it just sounds SO DAMN GOOD.

    How is Paul too weak on Terror? He's the only candidate with legislation to actually catch Bin Laden, and he's fought for better security by the airlines.

    That's a myth that he's weak on terror. He's just not interested in seeing America bankrupt itself in Iraq, 5 years after Saddam was removed from power. He's interested in trying to prevent another Vietnam.
     
    guerilla, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  10. northpointaiki

    northpointaiki Guest

    Messages:
    6,876
    Likes Received:
    187
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    It is unfortunate that such erroneous arrogance would wantonly say such things about an entire people. I think I know myself well enough to say that I, for one, am neither simple minded nor fanatical, and at least a few others in this land may not be, either. Just a guess.

    From what I can tell, Gauharjk is still quite critical of Obama. But it appears there is an "us" v. "them" mentality in place that reduces the world to simplicities, such that Gauharjk's comment makes the poster quite nervous, and he will impugn Gauharjk's good faith comment with this kind of remark. Unfortunate, and unfortunately the poster's matter of course, eventually, it seems to me.

    At any rate, to the OP's question, please allow a reprint on the subject of Obama's "socialism."

     
    northpointaiki, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  11. guerilla

    guerilla Notable Member

    Messages:
    9,066
    Likes Received:
    262
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #11
    Hey, has anyone figured out what Obama stands for yet?
     
    guerilla, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  12. unlockediphonesite.com

    unlockediphonesite.com Active Member

    Messages:
    294
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    60
    #12
    I have no idea. If we pull out of Iraq we will create a Vietnam. Catching Osama will not stop terror. Did it stop it in Iraq when we caught Saddam?


     
    unlockediphonesite.com, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  13. guerilla

    guerilla Notable Member

    Messages:
    9,066
    Likes Received:
    262
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #13
    Creating Vietnam would be a decent outcome all things considered. Our relations today with Vietnam are pretty good, except for all of the water supplies we poisoned with Agent Orange that are creating deformed and handicapped babies.

    We were wrong to go into Vietnam, and we were wrong to go into Iraq.

    One way or another the troops are coming home. We're pretty much out of money.
     
    guerilla, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  14. Dabro

    Dabro Peon

    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    15
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #14
    Agreed. But the fact is, we are there and we need to figure out a solution. Any dwelling on the past doesn't help.

    We can't just pull out. It would be chaos.
     
    Dabro, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  15. micksss

    micksss Notable Member

    Messages:
    4,427
    Likes Received:
    268
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    285
    #15
    There were no terrorists in Iraq under Saddam. They came in after he was taken out. A dictator doesn't like people f**king with his rule.
     
    micksss, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  16. guerilla

    guerilla Notable Member

    Messages:
    9,066
    Likes Received:
    262
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #16
    Worked in Vietnam.

    There is no moral justification for staying. The Iraqis want us gone.

    They actually see this as an occupation of their country, regardless of however we see it.
     
    guerilla, Mar 30, 2008 IP
  17. skyraider

    skyraider Peon

    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #17
    It's a plan of redistribution - and thus less efficient and far less effective than a laissez-faire plan. However, I do not agree that Obama has no idealogical connection to the roots of socialism. He is most certainly a Progressive, and the Progressives are strongly linked to socialistic ideas. To oversimply, they're a bunch of redistributionists who 'found religion' during the social gospel movement and began to idealize their political leaders. The idea is to unite people around a cause by creating a struggle, real or perceived, and move the human race to a higher state of happiness through science and government policy and what people are now calling "social justice." This is the Doctrine of Progress, and it's nothing new. This is also a foolish doctrine because the folks at the top (legislators) really don't know how to run things better than the folks at the bottom and in the middle. For example:

    - Legislators created a central banking system in the United States, which soon led us into the Great Depression. oops.
    - Legislators are about to regulate the crap of out US banks - with a plan devised by a Wall Street guru. oops.
    - Legislators think they know how much water to use for toilet flushing. Well, for a while, the 1.4gpf system required two or three flushes. oops.
    - Legislators told people not to drink raw milk. In reality, it's not that dangerous if handled properly; Ron Paul introduced a bill to destroy this restriction.
    - Legislators regulated the crap out of the US healthcare system, significantly contributing to a massive rise in cost and making healthcare all but unaffordable for regular folks. The solution? Oh - more regulations! Make those speciality hospitals illegal because they charge patients less and do a better job! WHAT??? AHHH!!!

    All of this talk about government being an enlightening experience only applies to people who agree with that government. For everyone else, government is a pain in the butt with dummies who think they know every industry.

    The problem that conservatives have with Progressives is that the Progressives childishly dismiss most free-market ideas as roadblocks in the Road to Heaven on Earth. This is idealogical and impractical, and the Progressives are usually wrong.

    Through the years, many Progressive leaders have held utopian ideals or implemented socialistic policies - FDR, for example (not an insult. actually very close to govn't control of means of production; price caps; other trash like that). And the ideas and rhetoric of Karl Marx have found their way into John Edward's campaign speeches.

    Clearly, I'm just generalizing; if you want a full, non-childish and well-researched explanation of the Progressive movement's links to socialism, read Liberal Facism. And don't dismiss the book before you've read it just because you disagree with it.

    In short: Obama's ideas stem more from the French Revolution than from the American Revolution, and from some other movements with which freedom-loving people do not associate. It's fine to hold these ideas, but they do not work better than capitalism when put into practice.
     
    skyraider, Apr 1, 2008 IP
  18. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #18
    Of course Barack Obama is a socialist. Everyone in the Democratic Party is a socialist. duh.

    Hell, a good portion of the Republican Party are socialists too. Even the Libertarian party seems to be infested with the little bastards.

    The real question today is: Will Barack Obama make a worse President than Hillary Clinton?

    That's a difficult call. Right now, I think he will. But, I have a certain sense of relief that the choice isn't in my hands.
     
    Will.Spencer, Apr 1, 2008 IP
  19. skyraider

    skyraider Peon

    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    8
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #19
    What?

    A socialist believes in government control of the means of production. Obama is just a naiive redistributionist. Clinton is a dirty liar, but not quite as naiive - just ignorant of economics. But I don't think you could easily name more than a handful of senators & reps that are actually socialists.
     
    skyraider, Apr 1, 2008 IP
  20. Will.Spencer

    Will.Spencer NetBuilder

    Messages:
    14,789
    Likes Received:
    1,040
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    375
    #20
    The socialists, by and large, have given up on actual direct ownership and management of productive resources.

    Instead, they just pass thousands of pages of laws and administrative policies which force private individuals to manage their productive resources in self-destructive ways.

    The results are the same; you can't polish a turd.
     
    Will.Spencer, Apr 1, 2008 IP
    TechEvangelist likes this.