Terry Jeffrey on CNN: Barack Obama, Medicare & Social Security are all socialist
So I guess the Official Republican Talking Points™ now include proclaiming that Barack Obama is a socialist who's more liberal than Bernie Sanders. It looks like those Bush/Cheney guys McCain hired are starting to earn their money.
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Heather)
BLITZER: But Bernie Sanders says he's a socialist.
JEFFREY: Well, I think Barack Obama is a socialist, and let me defend that remark.
First of all, I would say Barack Obama is the most left-wing candidate that's ever been nominated by a major party for president of the United States. But is he a socialist? This is a man who's campaigning with Hillary Clinton, arguing for who had a better nationalized health care program. A nationalized health care program, Wolf, is socialism. Another thing that Barack Obama...
BLITZER: Just because it's government sponsored doesn't mean it's socialist. [...] Do you believe Medicare or Medicaid is socialist?
JEFFREY: Well, yes. Actually, I would say that Medicare and Social Security are flat-out socialism.
What. A. Clown. If support for universal health care is a litmus test for determining whether someone is a socialist, I got bad news for Terry: 66% of Americans are socialists:
Why do they let these idiots on television? And I'm not even talking about Jeffrey. Look at how Wolf ended the segment:
"All right, guys. We've got to leave it right there, but a good, serious discussion. Thanks for coming in. "
Geez.
Socialism is the new name for public interest.
Hahahaha........American Universal Healthcare.....please deposit money in health corporations pockets...it's universal all right....the big Pharma companies have a universal grip on everything. Never could understand politicians that sell out people's health for big business profits....."you got a broken arm? How much money ya got? Sorry can't treat ya"
Dammit, when will people understand that being socialist, or hell, even Communist for that matter, does not mean you are the Spawn of Satan? The Canadians are socialist, and unless they've done something different when I wasn't looking, Canadians are generally better off than we are. Why is "socialist" a dirty word? (I already know the answer, it's rhetorical.)
ConcernedCanuck @ 2:
I'm an American nationalist, but even I won't defend our healthcare system.
Terry should put his money where his mouth is and stop paying taxes, since obviously he thinks anything paid for by funds that are taken from civilian income by the govenment is socialism, lets just devolve into anarchy and screw the whole government thing altogether, since thats pretty much socialism by his definition, too. The throw the baby out with the bathwater party, the same bathwater Grover Norquist used.
Some provisional infrastructure all of us need to maintain the greatest resource of this nation: ITS PEOPLE, and when you privatize that it wont serve its people, it will serve to whom it was privatized.
Health care, SS, Roads, education. theyre all bad. 'Screw the people, I am a pundit/author/blowhard/sycophant (rich), so I got mine,' right Terry?
Why are people concerned by this. Those that don't believe obama is a socialist would vote for him no matter what he was or what he did. AND those that want to believe that obama is a socialist wouldn't vote for him anyway, so the best thing to do is ignore them.
You could dress a clown in a suit, sit him down in front of a camera in full face makeup, have him say "Obama is a ______ " [fill in the blanks] and tomorrow the whole of the US will be absolutely convinced of whatever it is they are told.
Unless someone does something to drastically increase the IQ and general attention span of the 'merkan public the reslugs have already won.
Technically he is correct. This country has been a socialist democratic republic for about 80 years now, so maybe it's time we all recognize that fact. After that, lets start undemonizing "liberal".
Can't the Democrats Puuuulleeeeeeeeeeeeeeze start invoking Franklin Delano ROOSEVELT ?????
JEFFREY: "Well, I think Barack Obama is a socialist, and let me defend that remark.
First of all, I would say Barack Obama is the most left-wing candidate that’s ever been nominated by a major party for president of the United States."
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...WRONG !!! The greatest president of the 20th century FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT was muck more LIBERAL ! Ya know, the one those socialist americans voted in a RECORD 4 times to rescue America from that conservative-Republican GREAT DEPRESSION and the fascist menace both at home and abroad in WW2 !!
This clowns have been trying to undue FDR's New Deal since the '30s !
Democrats PUuuuullleeeeeeeeeeeeze use FDR's legacy as a cudgel to hammer these nimrods every time they try to confuse americans with the word "socialism"
They know their dorky followers confuse the word with totaltarian "Marxism" blah blah blah....
Just use FDR's legacy and mention all those great European "socialist" countries are actually FREE DEMOCRACIES with REGULATED capitalism !!
But these con morons think any regulation equates to totaltarian "Marxism" just to justify their theivery.
C'mon democrats...hire a damn linguist and fight back this con ignorance
FDR & Eleanor where are you ?????
yes, Wolf - a good, serious discussion.
for good, serious, IDIOTS.
How is extending the nation's resources for the public good (socialism) worse than rigging markets for the personal gain of a handful of corrupt businessmen (BushCo capitalism)?
Terry Jeffery...never heard of him until I consulted the Google.
Well, what do you expect from someone who worked for Pat Buchanan and was an editorial writer for the Washington Times where he was nominated for a Pulitzer (or was it a Polk?). He's now editor-at-large for the wildly popular Human Events.
Why should CNN or anyone else care what this tool thinks?
In a true democracy where the media actually presents multi points of view, there would have been a socialist on that program to debate Terry Jeffrey in his attempt to smear socialism. But in the corporate media that is not going to happen. By engaging in this base rhetoric, Jeffrey ends up not only marginalizing socialism but by inference, practically comparing it to Stalinism. Despite Jeffrey's contention, Obama is far from being a socialist, since Obama's plan, unlike single payer, keeps the insurance and pharmacy companies in the equation, thereby insuring that profit will be placed over the needs of the people. Obama is a centrist who by his drifting will soon be to the right of John McCain. People like Jeffrey are deathly afraid of seeing and hearing a true socialist as that person in all likelihood would make both Obama and McCain look quite foolish by exposing how they both are tools for the corporate capitalist establishment. The corporate executives will make sure that this, or the appearance of a third party candidate, is not going to happen in the upcoming debates between the two major corporate political candidates.
@ Marge 6:
I respectfully disagree. I had a fairly reasonable friend tell me the other day that he thought Obama was a socialist. These memes get out there. My response was, we are all socialists. He said "I'm not! The Germans are socialists, so they have double the unemployment we do." I responded, "Really? So you are opposed to public highschools being available to all Americans? Because that is pure unadulterated socialism."
I think it made him think, at least a little bit.
Ruth @ 1:
Socialism has always been the name for public interest. The minute you talk about people banding together either through government, unions or coops, you're a socialist (communist works well also). It's a strategy employed to keep us divided - easier pickins that way. It's a strategy reaily adopted by the angry and paranoid. All progress has been made by running the gauntlet of monkey poo flung by the proto Birchrs, the Birchers and the Neo Birchers. I can remember a day when they were considered the cranky old crackpots they are.
C'mon panic-stricken right wing, get your story straight. Is he a secret Muslim with ties to the terrorists or the most liberal presidential candidate ever?
Sillies.
Blitzer used to work for Pat Robertson at CBN. What did you expect?
Right. If we're unable to rip-off the American people, anything preventing us from doing that is 'socialist'.
Yes, the right thinks any benefits you get from paying taxes is socialism. What they really want is simply for us to pay the corporations for doing nothing. Great idea because then the corporations don't even need to sell us products to steal our money (whether we need the shitty products made in China they sell or not).
I'll bet that almost all of the Republicans watching that said something like, "Yeah...we don't need no socialists. Obama IS a lefty. Damn lefty socialist liberals. They're killing Amurika with their socialist programs that help people. They're just like communists which ain't anything like us people for democracy and freedom."
Socialist yes, but our government is FASCIST!!!
If you applied the Nuremburg Law, every post WW2 President is a war criminal.
When McCain got shot down he was bombing a city, you know houses.
broadsword @ 17:
Source?
Leadership @ 20:
You noticed that too? Hmmm.
Obama is a Carteresque, Bush-like neocon socialist and elitist Muslim ,etc. What a variety.
Rovian tactic targeting swing-voters?
Socialism is often an intelligent choice. It's the sign of debased political thinking to dismiss it out of hand. Your elite media and political class would do well to pull their heads out of their asses, only they've been stuck up there so long that they've all turned to shit.
These people are afraid we're going to wind up like USSR? We'll we already are like the USSR. So we me as well have free dental.
It’s scary to hear someone carry-on like Pat. But it’s sort of strange to realize that Pat and Wolf Blitzer go way back together. Yep! Wolf used to work for Pat Robertson's CBN way back when Pat was setting up his news bureau and Wolf was the 700 Club’s reporter from the Middle East. He was a lot younger in those days, but in those beginning days Pat exposed Wolf Blitzer to a viewing audience that topped the Nielsen ratings at 28.7 million monthly viewers! That’s a great way to launch one’s career. But Wolf Blitzer likes to keep that part of his career kind of quiet. He doesn’t list the 700 Club’s news bureau in his biography. He doesn’t tell CNN’s audience that Pat was like an angel to him when he was just an independent reporter starting out. But those of us who watched Pat’s show could never forget Wolf Blitzer’s reports. He was presented to us as such an expert—we were just so proud of him! And look how high he’s gone. You’d think he’d give Pat a little credit. No doubt he says “Thanks” by inviting him on CNN!
Well, hypothetically speaking if Obama were a socialist the way I see it is we've had 7 1/2 years of a corrupt, self-serving, fascist Republican regime and now the country's fucked, so why not try a socialist Democrat for a change?
The goal of these reich wingers is to try to scare the voters into thinking the damage a Democrat could do would be worse than the damage the Republicans have already done, which is hardly possible.
Obama a Socialist?
Like I'm a cardinal--the avian or the clerical variety, take your pick.
Obama's a toothless, corpoRat centrist, who will continue to deal the US commons to the CorpoRat bosses for the lowest price he can get...
We've had socialism for the last 75 years; in that time we defeated the Fascists, the samurai, the communists, defended the other socialist nations, and became the worlds ONLY Superpower.
We sent men to the moon, we're now playing with toys on Mars, unlocking the secrets of the genome, and building electronic life!
Far from being the "Road to Serfdom", socialism has been the golden road to prosperity; on the other hand; our flirtation with Slave State politics has been the "Leer Jet to Serfdom" undoing all of the gains of socialism in a very short time.
If/when America goes down, it will be the "low information" voter and their Dixie politicians that will be to blame; and God-willing, they will pay the full price for their malignancy.
Put a wig on her already! She'll be caught in an airport men's room by the end of next week. Just another, soft, pudgy, reactionary, conservative closet case.
I can't stand this guy's voice. Has he been neutered?
King of Kings @ 29:
America's going down now for the reasons you just laid out and I would ad because of the self-serving corrupt conservative elite who have bankrupted the country with tax cuts for the rich and costly oil wars for their big oil buddies. Al-Queda tried but couldn't bring down America, that job has been done by the GOP.
I don't trust men named "Terry"
Why do we let the Rethug conservatives and neo-cons, define America? There are certain inalienable qualities that define standard of living. They keep beating to death the myth of capitalism where doses of reality are the relevancy. Fixed infrastructure (road, bridges, security) and human standards (health, schools, police, etc.) are not subject to redefinition just because there are cost associated. Follow the money. Lets track the top ten lobbyists so we grasp their definition of "capitalism". Then the reality discussions should begin. Bailouts, corporate greed, illegal contracts all should be expressed in terms of cost to whom.
Bitter Bud Hussein @ 33:
or Pat.
As a socialist let me clear something up: tax-funded health care for all citizens IS socialistic. It's about time typical Democrats recognize that their most humane impulses are guided by socialist thought. It will do them good to embrace the idea instead of trying to negate it.
Classic socialized medicine employs the personnel and does the paperwork. Public hospitals pay their staff in public money, but both government entities and insurance companies are billed, and some doctors also have private practices. Private hospitals are just that. We don't have socialized medicine and because of lobbies probably never will, but we could have universal health care. Insurance companies have 8-10x the overhead of Medicare, even including the fraud of bogus equipment suppliers, for instance. We also pay retail+ for meds to support lower prices everywhere else, which is why the current prescription plan is such a loser.
The government is the last thing i'd want running healthcare. They can be incompetent with everything else, but not with peoples health.
We do need a better system though. What we have at the moment is beyond a joke.
Democracy is socialist, get over it. It's collectively participatory and that will always frighten a singular corporatists mindset.
woody, tokin librul @ 26:
Wolf worked for the Jerusalem Post, and thus had instant cred.
VietVet67 @ 31:
If only. Less far right conservatives breeding would be good for the country....not that there's any danger this one would ever have sex with a woman.
Funded and controlled by government?
If this is so evil and socialist maybe Terry Jeffry should complain about all those hundreds of billions of dollars that is spent on the military, the Pentagon budget is just huge! Maybe he should talk about the huge subsidies for corporate agriculture.......etc. Of course he will keep his focus on the narrow subject of Medicare and Social Security. Wingnut welfare just doesn't make it into this so-called serious discussion.
Funded and controlled by government? Does he drive a car? Well he should stay off those highways that are funded and controlled by government. Maybe he should stay out of all the airports, funded and controlled by government. What a putz!
Frank Luntz must love the demonizing of the word socialist.
As long as he's not a nazi or a communist, I guess socialist Obama like Swedes and Canadians could really make a difference and realize Gore's recent objective to make the US "totally green" ten years from now. Just imagine USA 2018. Unemployment 1%, people saving instead of consuming, a totally new philosophy, sort of like "I saved 10 thousands dollars this year mate", "And what did you buy?", "Buy?" "You mean like in the second half of the XX century and the first decade of the new millennium when people where encouraged to spend more than they earned? In the post-Bush era when the US jobs where insourced back thanks to the "green revolution", people actually stopped buying mindlessly and discovered how cool money saving is, although it can have something to do with increased wages after we said no to Chinese cheap labor and started producing again on the US soil." "Wow, so did you buy the new plasma TV?", "No, I bought mine in 2008 and it still works perfectly." "Hmm, are you a commie or something?" "No, and are you the last Republican specie, a member of the party that ceased to exist 4 year ago after its rewritten philosophy proved to be even more treasonous and destructive and the Obama administration with help of the liberal Supreme Court abolished it completely?" "Yeah, I guess you're right, we did f**k up so so much back in those days. Did you hear about our last initiative. It's promising. Our leaders call it "Collective Bible thumbing to get back to power" "Wow, you've really lost it people" "You think so?" "F**k yeah!!!"
Basically this ass-clown is saying the GOP hates Democracy.
In a Democracy the people can vote in any programs they desire, or at least vote for representatives who do the deed. Medicare and Social Security have proved to be historically popular and successful programs that benefit the mass of people, and that is really scary for these anti-socialism types who are fist in line for no-bid government contracts, corporate tax breaks, ignoring white collar crime, and of course tax payer BAILOUTS to corporations that have criminally increased their bottom line, and completely mismanaged themselves.
But that's okay. Using the common pool of tax dollars to make the rich even richer and to help and bailout corporations controlled by the richest of the rich is a good American and not socialist thing to do. Helping the other 99% of Americans is Totally EVIL!
Yep, sarcasm alert, that makes sense to me.
Does Terry Jeffrey take his "socialist" tax deduction for his offspring? Did he send his kids to public schools...probably not. Does he use tax-payer funded police when he needs to? Does he drive on the Interstate Highway system? Every time these guys get on TV they go unchallenged!
Marge @ 6:
Agreed, but we need to relentlessly hammer in a few facts the way they relentessly hammer in all the lies:
Obama is the most liberal? It only appears that way to someone who, like McCain, voted with Bush 99% of the time.
No one should ever get to say "most liberal" without our side saying, "McCain voted with Bush 100% of the time". (Let them argue it was only 99%).
Health care is Socialism? Then every member of Congress is either a greedy, selfish liar who keeps health care for himself and his family at our expense, or they're all Socialists. Which is it?
And which member of the GOP has ever voted against lifetime free health care for themselves and their families?
If Medicare and Social Security are Socialism, then isn't a lifetime of benefits after one term in Congress just welfare for the undeserving rich?
Let them argue that they either: don't get the benefits they get, deserve them for life after one term, or it isn't Socialism/Communism/Welfare when they get it - only if we do.
Someone on the Dem's side needs to ask these questions each and every time a Repug opens his mouth.
Wolf is not the Problem he is a symptom of the problem. The real problem is Corporate News and there lack of objectivity. CNN. is just another player in the game. Most people would be better off listening to the BBC. because the American
Corporate Media Machine has already decided who they want to win and it is NOT
Obama in other words get ready for four more years of Bush.
Ruthless People @ 35:
Or "Wolf"
Ruthless People @ 35:
Hey, wait a darn minute there.
Yes, it is socialism.. true socialism, not the corrupt contemporary definition made popular by socialist tyrants.
But lets look at it closer... it is a socialist program in which money provided by the citizens (taxes) is used to provide a service for the citizens... kinda like how a city takes property tax revenues for building roads that everyone can use.
The repugs have a problem with this.
They much prefer capitalism where the citizen's taxes are used to bail out huge companies so that the benefits are (for the most part) seen by a select few very rich people.
This would be like your city building a grand new highway through town, and only allowing it to be used by the CEO's and other executives of the companies which made the biggest campaign contributions (which in total come nowhere near paying for the road).
The frequent mis-use of language has trained the population to reject that which is in their best interest in favor of that which is obviously detrimental to their best interests.
A shining example of this is how the word "freedom" has been used to dismantle the only system which can guarantee freedom - that would be the Constitution.
Slabo @ 9:
Yes, yes, yes!!
Can we please get a democrat to verbally disembowel these morons and their talking point catch phrases?
How about responding with; "trillions in no bid contracts for Bush cronies, and charged to the taxpayers is "economic investment" or some other republican conservative b.s. But health insurance for families who CAN"T buy private insurance is socialism. Yeah right.
I would look right into the camera and say: "the billionaire republicans like Bush/Cheney are the BIGGEST SOCIALIST'S on the face of the American continent! They steal more taxpayer dollars in one afternoon, than 100,000 taxpaying Americans (like you) will get in their lifetimes! Why is anything that benefits ALL the people socialism, but if a couple of multi-millionaire fatcat republican corporate cronies get trillions in no-bid contracts from taxpayer dollars its called "liquidity enhancement," or some other Wallstreet term? America, you need to quit voting for your own economic suicide by letting these "upper class socialist's" pull the wool over your eyes again! They are fooling you into sacrificing your childrens future, while gorging at the taxpayer trough themselves."
hellbent @ 47:
Volfie should have a crawler on the screen everytime he speaks, explaining that he, along with CNN's "political analyst" Bill Scheiffer, are members of the ultra-conservative AEI, American Enterprise Institute, along with the Dark Lord, Dick(less) Cheney.
How many Americans still think that these corporate facist shills are impartial because they're on the TV?
If Jeffrey Terry, or Terry Jeffrey, whatever her name is....were to fall on hard times she would be the first one with her hand out for money from the government. Selfish conservatives want to use our tax dollars fo "government handouts" for themselves but not for the poor and middle class, like Dick Cheney's no bid government contracts to Halliburton that raised his Halliburton stock over 3000%. http://www.rawstory.com/news/2005/Cheneys_stock_options_rose_3281_last_1... and made him 8 million dollars.
The corrupt self-serving conservative elite are America's #1 threat, foreign or domestic, bar none. As long as they are in power America will never be safe economically, militarily or constitutionally.
justpat @ 49:
ok, ok....Pat if the last name is Robertson or Buchannan. Better?
It doesn't matter the Neoneanderthals think any more, the reality is biting them in the ass every day now.
Iraqi PM backs Obama troop exit plan - magazine
http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSL1980090
BERLIN, July 19 (Reuters) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki told a German magazine he supported prospective U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that U.S. troops should leave Iraq within 16 months.
A Deputy Dilemma For McCain
On Wednesday morning, The Post published a poll of registered voters giving Barack Obama an eight-point lead -- largely because the voters said they trusted him more than John McCain on handling their No. 1 issue, the economy, by an astounding 19 percentage points.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/18/AR200807...
McCain has as much chance of winning as a rock does on Mars
I want that job. How cool would it be to get paid to "think up" a "new" talking point every 4 years?
Trillion dollar subsidies for oil companies, wars fought on behalf of oil companies, contracts for politically well connected companies, and favors for companies after receiving political donations....I mean, whats the difference between corporate socialism and people socialism??? On one side your helping extremely rich people out, but on the other side your helping extremely poor people out. The only difference I see is that the people who don't need the help, get the help while the people who need the help don't get the help. Who does this government represent anyways?
Reno @ 50:
Yes, and our "freedom" and free market system has brought us the largest system of privatized prisons in the world, and the world's largest prison population./strong>
For them, "the Right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness", is actually, "Their Right to have the Liberty to Pursue Profit for all their Lives", without interference from the peons who pave their way for them.
Leadership @ 20:
If you applied the Nuremberg and Tokyo laws, the WWII Presidents were war criminals as well. Dresden, headhunting in the Pacific, repeated massacres of both European and Asian Axis forces, the firebombings of Japan and the A-Bomb qualify the US government of that era as well. Do you really want to put FDR on the same moral level as somebody like Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Tojo Hideki and all that? Yes, Stalin was on our side before anyone points that out, but that just proves the Allies were not exactly Saintly Knights in Shining ArmorTM against the EBIL DEMONStm.
Ruthless People @ 54:
"The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor—not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. In this respect, it is important to realize that the means of production—that is to say, the entire productive capacity that is needed for producing consumer goods as well as additional capital goods—may legally be, and for the most part are, the private property of individuals." - Albert Einstein, as published in the first issue of Monthly Review, May 1949, essay entitled Why Socialism?
A Capitalist would necessarily not think much of Socialism and would love for the non-thinkers to conjure up visions of Stalin, Red China, et. al. So the "right wing freak show" gets freakier!
Wolf - you are such a smarmy POS - please go away.
VegasRage @ 55:
He only leads on the economy by 19%. Man, it should be an 80% lead on the economy.
There really is a whole lotta stupid goin' on out there in the American voting public. How anyone who is conscious, (and lived through the last eight years of repuke-corporate theivery and economic rape) could still pick these clowns on the economy, is beyond any rational thinking process.
Miatch @ 14:
I'm surprised he didn't have the balls to say "Yes," like his forebears did in the 19th Century to the scandalous idea that the schools weren't just for churches or the wealthy.
VegasRage @ 55:
Especially if he picks this guy as VP http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/us/politics/19romney.html?_r=1&sq=romn...
Clemdog @ 61:
Except that when he was writing that, Einstein was referring to Stalin's hell-on-earth, I'd agree with you. Stalin had a huge number of apologists on the Left in the 1930s, and Hitler on the Right. Capitalism, had FDR not stepped in to save it, would either have fallen to fascism or communism.
Everytime I hear this Reslug moron, with his high feminine voice, I 'm reminded again that he never did have any balls.
You could make a very thin argument that Obama is a socialist, based on his support for (technically) social programs like Medicare, sure.
The problem is that you could make the same kind of argument to prove that that the mainstream Republican Party is a fascist party. And you wouldn't even have to go as far out on a limb.
Maybe all these rightwing republiscum fucktards who are so adamantly opposed to socialism should refuse to accept their Social Security check when they turn 65.
Yeah right.
Ruthless People @ 32:
And you don't think that Al Qaeda didn't exploit our greatest weakness, the far right, reactionary Bush administration, their knee-jerk right wing supporters, a lame MSM too cowed by corporate ownership and timidity to do anything other than cheer lead, and an American public too fearful and reactionary to think? Stir in Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, a willing Republican party, oil, and fear to be exploited and here we are. America will be lucky to survive Al Qaeda's Bush II bomb.
taking money from one person and giving it to another is socialism, Barak is trying to buy votes with other peoples money!! People need to start taking better care of themselves and healthcare problems would go away!
I thought "socialism" was when the government owned the means of production and distribution. In which case nationalized health care, at least as proposed by Obama or Hillary, is not socialist.
I used to support the Republicans myself....and I was all for small government...but then I realize, woah, wait a minute....how can Republicans keep calling themselves small government when all they do is grow government when their elected? On top of that they support corporate welfare and blowing tax payers money on tax cuts for the rich. Who has to flip the bill?? Me and YOU. So how can any reasonable small gov't conservative support such a party? If their gonna support a big government party, they might as well vote for the party that has the people more in mind, rather then their corporate buddies.
As a Brit, I'm always puzzled how US politicians talk about socialism as if it's a bad thing.
What's wrong with Socialism? Why is this the "Boogey Man?"
We already have socialism for the rich. When a major corporation starts to go under the Government bails it out starting with Chrysler in the 1970s.
I never recieved a penny of Chrysler's profits. Nor have i recieved a check from any of the major airlines before or after 9/11 but they sure did get a lot of our money.
Fannie Mae and Feddie Mac have newver bought me a house but we sure did keep them afloat.
Socialism is when our tax money goes to help the people (and that's "bad!")
Capitalism is when our tax money goes to help the Capitalists and we are supposed to think that is wonderful.
Eat me.
Yet McCain has no problem accepting social security payments, which he is not required to accept. Republicans are hypocritical.
jimmiraybob @ 69:
The only problem with this is that it assumes Al Qaeda was able to exploit the chain of command and, using prior knowledge of secret training missions, was able to thwart NORAD and it's $30B yearly budget without the assistance of the highest level of government.
At some point, people have to come to grips with the idea that Al Qaeda and GOP are the same bloody thing. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is/was Al Qaeda not run by one Usama Bin Laden, trained and armed by none other than George Herbert Bush? Are the Bush and Bin Laden families not business partners in oil and munitions?
And has this not all added astronomical capital to their bank accounts?
A vote for the GOP is a vote for the Majahudin.
And one more comment.
The republican theory is that when rich people get richer, the money will trickle down into the general population and help everyone. Well, if that was true...then why are the poor getting poorer while the rich get richer???????????????????
Can any republican answer me this?
oh yes, the gop will really go far this year with it's surrogates campaigning against social security and medicare.
i do hope they all hold the same views and spout them loudly and regularly.
xoites defends Constitution @ 74:
Yes, Comrade, let us go join our fellow comrades in organizing our purge against the Kulaks! Down with the autocracy! Peace, Land, Bread! Replace the feudal American system with our Brand, Shiny, New SovietismTM.
If you can't tell this is a dark form of snarkcasm, please leave this site, now, as your lack of a sense of humor is a curse on the human race. Thank you, please remember to flush on your way out.I really don't pay much attention to republican liars. Same old garbage every four years.
Rusty Shackleford @ 71:
Very true, but then again what is wrong with government owning at least some forms of production such as the oil under the ground and the means to extract it? The resources in third world countries being owned by multinational companies is what has made these third world countries in the first place and created an imbalance of wealth on the planet.
gitrdone @ 77:
In reality, the rich don't spend money because they don't need anything - they hoard it. That's what makes them rich(er).
Give the money to the poor, they will spend every dime of it because they need everything.
Spending money, keeping it in circulation, is paramount to floating the economy. The more the money accumulates at the top, the more things slow down until finally the giants begin to collapse due to lack of customers/clients.
This current depression can be attributed directly to the Bushco policy of trickledown economics. It was both predicted and inevitable.
General_Rennenkampf @ 65:
Point taken -
But, in that FDR propped up Stalinist Russia and Hitler's Germany (See: Prescott Bush) from his Capitalistic perch - Capitalism really wasn't threatened. The global struggle today however: (from the US's Capitalistic "perch") How do you stop Socialism? (From the perch of "Average Joe" on the streets of Hometown, USA) - Maybe Socialism GOOD. Maybe Capitalism BAD. Me want Socialism. Maybe me want president who want what I want.
Reno @ 76:
What. the. flying. fuck?
Is it really that hard for people to comprehend that angry Muslims can hate the US enough to come up with the simple idea of plane + building = boom? I mean, the Japanese took a whole damn fleet of ships all the way across the Pacific, hit everywhere at once, and nobody once expected or saw them coming! And Japan had equally justifiable reasons to hate us as Mr. Bin Laden.
Clemdog @ 83:
FDR had little desire to prop up either Hitler or Stalin. Considering he was basically laying bait for Germany to take us into war from 1939 onwards, his actions contradict what you're saying. FDR wasn't a real-life Elder of Zion.
True statement.
That's why the Corporatists have worked so hard to give Socialism a bad name.
General_Rennenkampf @ 79:
Are you suggesting the only way to have social justice is through mass murder? Obviously that is impossible in the first place. Name an economic system whose most zealous and misguided supporters were disdainfull of murder.
Jeffrey failed to say that public education was socialist, whatever is left of it. What's not socialist though, according to the right, is public financing (aka bailouts) of failed banks and corporations.
It will get much, much worse before November. We have had, and continue to have kristol shilling for the "war criminals" in the repuke party, and now we have jeffrey shilling for the "domestic infrastructure criminals".
This election is going to be as dirty a repuke fight as we have ever seen. It will make the despicable mccain-bush dustup during the nomination fight in 2000, and the swift-boating of Kerry, look like kindergarten games.
The Obama camp needs to hit McCain on this: "McCain wants to end social security. McCain surrogate labels medicare as socialism." McCain needs to be asked flat out if he would end these programs.
Thank you again Crooks & Liars for another fine post in which Socialism is discussed in a (mostly) intelligent manner.
My conspiracy theory for the day:
What they want is a nobles/serfs kind of society. And they're getting it. No manufacturing, only the service industry (to serve them) and the rich. So they make it harder and harder to get enough higher education to pull yourself out of serfdom. This also leaves all of the enrollment in higher education for their children, the spoiled, the stupid, the truly unable to compete on an equal playing field. They eliminate jobs and careers that make it possible to have a good life in the middle class. They make sure that no one who isn't at least in such middle class to get health care or contraception. So the serfs die young but have large families. Who can't get educations. Who have only service jobs available to them. To serve the rich. I don't even think this is outlandish, it's what I see us turning into unless we stop it.
xoites defends Constitution @ 87:
Note the part struck through. It was a dark joke, not intended to be serious. Perhaps I should have put that part in the strike through like it is now...
naschkatze Hussein @ 88:
Right. So McCain, do you stand for socialism for Wall Street while ending social security for Main Street?
Wendy @ 92:
If they want that....
they'd better remember that even when democracy as we know didn't exist and societies could be up to 75% slave, it didn't stop things like the Helot revolt or the Servile Wars. If they really want that, then they're fucking stupid.
What earthly reason is there in a Democracy to tax people if the tax money is not used to benefit those who are taxed? Anything else is a feudal system.
General_Rennenkampf @ 84:
lol you're kidding me.
They saw the japs coming. Just like they saw the "angry muslims" coming.
But let me point out that it was Cheney and not the Muslims who ordered the defenses to stand down. Why?
Blanket uncontested support.
No one would dare oppose the government lest they be called traitors.
Plane + building = boom. Yes it does.
But, taking said plane on a sight-seeing tour of the most heavily defended airspace in the world (over washington dc) during a known aerial attack before slamming it into the very center of military command - without help - is just not a believable scenario.
General_Rennenkampf @ 93:
Sorry, when it comes to discussing Socialism too many people pretend it has something to do with Sovietism. :)
So let me get this right; "socialist" is the new snarl label being thrown against the wall by the Neocon Fairies? So any dollar or tax break that goes to a non-corporate entity from the government is "socialist." How is this collective ownership of the means of economic production and distribution?
I seriously don't think these full-of-shit Neocons even believe their own chickenshit.
OK OK, one more comment.
Republicans suuure love this FISA spying bill...but isn't this big government wanting to know what your business is??? I thought real conservatives hated big government spying on them, since when has it became okay? Isn't real, hardcore socialism...even Marxism... a belief that the everyone is a property of the state?? Well, when big government is spying on you...then doesn't that make you feel like your a property of the state??? In this case, your not trusted by the state. Just like the communists in China, they have to control their population by keeping an eye on everything they say. They don't trust their people, just like the Bush administration doesn't trust you enough to let you make phone calls without them spying on your conversation.
And I love the argument these Republicans make: "Well, if you didn't do anything, then why worry?" Umm, hello! If you didn't do anything, then why should they spy on you??? And of course, they don't see the potential abuse that can come out of this. The chances of anyone being killed in a terrorist attack is extremely low. We have way more people being killed in car accidents. Yet, the government thinks they have a right to take your freedoms away with the promise of protecting you??????????????????
anney @ 96:
That's a bit narrow, it could be an oligarchy, an absolute monarchy, a Spartan system or something entirely new, you know. Lack of imagination is supposed to be a GOP flaw.
The police and fire departments are socialism too. Maybe we should get rid of those programs as well.
The curent gummint stands for bailouts of corporations, while it lets those who suffer as a result of the criminality/misdeeds/miscalculations of corporations deal with job losses, home losses, etc., on their own. I call that "fuckyou politics".
Reno @ 97:
Neither is a nation straining to produce military weaponry and short of men, fuel, supplies, and options launching an attack like Pearl Harbor. It happened regardless of how likely it was. For a less cliche scenario, it was hardly likely that one battle of a powerful centralized state against eastern Turkish-speaking nomads (Manzikert) could spell the coming end of the Eastern Roman Empire. It did. Likeliness, or lack thereof, is nothing. History is all about the improbable happening.
Bismarck @ 99:
What i would prefer to know is why they think that would be a bad thing and how do they convince everybody who is getting shafted by capitalism to be afraid of socialism or even something that they hint is socialist? How do they manage time and time again to convince people to act against their best self interest?
xoites defends Constitution @ 98:
And they're stupid to do so, too. Canada is a socialist country. So is most of Western Europe. I'd take a reasonably-adjusted for the US version (not stating more capitalist, just adjusted to the much larger US population spread out over a large area.)
Flash @ 102:
So's your military. Think of the savings there.
Reno @ 82:
More like trickle UP economics if you ask me. Very good point you made. Your right, and of course it's no where more evident then the recent offshore banking scheme by CEO's unraveled just a few days ago. We give them huge tax cuts they don't need and on top of that they try to hide money in foreign accounts to avoid paying even more taxes. It's no wonder the rich are getting ever more richer.
General_Rennenkampf - you have points but also strawmen.. That said, I will defer reply to the next open thread so as not to hijack this one..
Reno @ 109:
We could simply take this to the old one, it's not much active, you know...
xoites defends Constitution @ 105:
The message keeps gettting hammered again and again at them thru the corporate media until they actually believe it.
SOCIALISM!!!!
Marvin El Canucki @ 107:
But think about what the military is actually used for. It is to protect the trade lines of corporations. There is no way in the world Exxon could make so much money without our navy. When it comes to them paying for it though that is another matter.
It would serve America well if most Americans could learn the definition of just six words (for the sake of simplicity, I am not going to quote a dictionary but instead break it down in my own way).
Fascism: According to Mussolini, the father of fascism, it is the merger of business interest with government (or political) interest. Where do you see a more pervasive example of this than in the United States under the Bush administration? Labeling terrorist as Islamo-fascist is not only incorrect but it is purposely deceiving. Islamic radicals are theocratic and totalitarian in nature and they don't give a damn about what business wants; they don't have to because...
Totalitarianism: This is the political practice of all for one and... well all for one. The dictator has complete or total control, as the name suggests, with no oversight and no accountability. It is the unitary executive philosophy to the max. An example would be Iraq, North Korea, Germany under Hitler (keep in mind that Germany was a democracy until the rise of Hitler after the Enabling Act).
Democracy: The political practice of allowing the citizens to vote (or have representatives vote for them) on all matters of government. In its purest form, the government shou
Can some one tell me what is so bad about a wealthy nation taking care of the health of it's people? Socialism, the curtailing of the rich's ability to get even more disgustingly rich. "Restricting my ability to take profit is impinging upon my FREEDOM, wahhhhhhhhh."
Buckeye Nut Schell @ 113:
You said six, you listed three. Is that a public school education speaking (of course, I really shouldn't say that, but meh)?
The unfettered corporatism and fascism of the Republican ideology has never worked. The most successful societies have always been social democracies. Sure glad social security is not privatized into fannie and freddie and enron and bear sterns!
Post Office- Costs to delever to the outreaches of this country would be astroomical under a free market post. Notice UPS and Fed Ex don’t even try to do letter mail. Post Office is socialized mail delivery.
Our roads are socialized all the way–it would not be profitable to build roads to the outreacches of this country, so we would be a disconnected mess without socialized roads.
Our military is socialized. I suppose you want Blackwater defending you in exchange for a buck?
Our police, fire, etc. are socialized. You want your house saved or life protected only if you can afford it? Or Blackwater doing it, but only if it fits the bottom ine?
Our education system is socialized-It has many flaws, but you want only the rich to be educated?
Now, let us look at the enemy of Democracy and choice, which is unfettered and unregulaed capitalism. Regulated Capitalism is fabulous, but in an unregulated environment, capitalists job is to try to control the markets. Let to their own devices, and few giant companies would control the markets, leaving yoou with little choices. Anyway, look at all of the industries that have been deregulated under Republicans: S&L scandal, Enron, the Airlines, power companies in CA, banking industry (Fannie/Freddie/Bear Sterns), etc.
The true choice is not socialism or fascism, it is socialized democracy. Republicans would like fascism, but that has never worked.
I'd love to see a liberal go on TV and call this group of Republicans exactly what they are: Corporate Fascists.
Socialism or Fascism of the GOP. Let me see. I will take socialism and make the corrupt few give some back via taxes. Next.
General_Rennenkampf @ 115:
I think he may have been detained mid-sentence.
Elizabeth Edwards liked Hillary's health care plan better than Obama's -- and Barack is MORE socialist that Hillary.
Republican's showing their true colors again. . . a country that cares for it's poor and it's sick and elderly is to the Repulbican mind WRONG and SOCIALIST.
Republican party for the rich screw everyone.
xoites defends Constitution @ 119:
Another joke. Guess I really need to work on faceless delivery, eh?
xoites defends Constitution @ 119:
Yeah, looks like a posting error to me too.. I for one would like to see the rest of the post.
LOL! :)
Reno @ 122:
You decided whether or not you want to take our discussion upthread to the Open Thread below? Not like many other people would be interfering?
I am so glad you caught this -- I was watching it yesterday and couldn't believe my ears. But you left out the funniest bit: when Jeffrey says that "socialism is government ownership of something." Jeffrey must believe we're a really socialist country, with that kind of broad definition: socialist police, socialist firemen, socialist schools, socialist federal reserve, socialist highways, socialist postal service, socialist space program, socialist military, socialist courts and socialist jails . . . Well, unfortunately for Jeffrey, George W. Bush is the biggest socialist yet of our recent presidents: domestic spending up 55% under his watch!
Deja vu... We have been here before....
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Acceptance Speech for the Renomination for the Presidency, Philadelphia, Pa.
June 27th, 1936
Excerpt:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/print.php?pid=15314
Liz @ 125:
Gahh! That guy's ignorance is appalling. Socialism, at least of the sort most people on this site would hold to, is the government nationalizing the means of production by democratic means. What he is giving a dog-whistle for is old-school Bolshevist insanity, which is a different animal as much as a gorilla is from a Neanderthal.
Liz @ 125:
Yeah, on "Homeland Security"...
Two things that I think should be socialized.
1. Health care
2. Energy
It works in a real democracy. (Venezuela)
Ron @ 129:
Venezuela a democracy? Sure, if the Congo is really a Democratic Republic.
General_Rennenkampf @ 130:
Do some real research. Don't pay attention to the MSM.
JEFFREY: Well, I think Barack Obama is a socialist, and let me defend that remark. First of all, I would say Barack Obama is the most left-wing candidate that’s ever been nominated by a major party for president of the United States.
======================
That, seriously, is the most absurd statement I've heard in weeks.
Obama is about as far from 'left' as it gets. In fact, Obama is conventiently tucked where the republican party should be (slightly to the right) as opposed to where they are now (Far to the right).
America has plenty of good left-wing candidates but we didn't vote for them.
Capt. Bat Hussein Guano @ 114:
Nothing, but it is a clear display of the quasi-orwellian methods by the conservatives in this country to frame the debate.
Based on their own merits, the policies of the GOP really only benefit 5% to 10% (tops on a very good day) of the population. So there is no way in hell they would ever be elected, in fact they should have been relegated to be a marginal political group long ago, if this country was a representative democracy with actual free press.
Now, if you look at the GOP predicament it is all a problem of marketing: they need to convince basically 50% of the population to actually vote against their own interests. So they embark in these PR campaigns.
If you look at it, their MO is very simple; take a concept that goes against the GOP interests, in this case... "socialism" and demonize it. However, they never discuss what it is so bad about "socialism." Heck, half of their talking heads could not even define the term even if their lives depended on it. But they start with the assumption that "socialism is bad because." And they use that as an axiom, and make it an evident truth by hammering the message as a weird "borg-like" collective of talking heads. It is scare how on cue these conservatives are. They did the same to "liberal" or "public" etc, etc. All concepts that are related for the common good, and that they managed to turn into negatives via a method which would have made Goebbels proud.
Why can they get away with it? Because NO ONE IN THE FUCKING MEDIA DOES THEIR JOB. When a GOPer parrots "he is a socialist" as a sort of an insult. They should have a question thrown back at them: why is socialism a negative. Instead the media allows them to go unchallenged in these sort of ridiculous axiom building exercises.
It is pathetic really, to a foreigner looking at this exchange it would look like a surreal display of totalitarian propaganda. And that what this nation may have degenerated into, not even Orwell could have predicted that a minority would take over a country without bloodshed and impose policies that go against the majority of the population, with said population not only blindly accepting these toxic policies but actually defending them to their death.
It was true that fascism in this country would come from a bible with a flag wrapped around it. So now, what?
Ron @ 131:
I have. Chavez is no more and no less democratic than the average South American leader, none of whom approach Bush-level First World democracy.
Ruth @ 1:
It's actually a very old name. Bolshevik. Leninist. Trotskyite. Communist. Pinko. Those come to mind also.
Ron @ 131:
Venezuela has its own issues when it comes to democratic processes.
You could have used most of Western Europe as an example.
I know socialists. Socialists are good friends of mine. Obama is no socialist (more's the pity).
New World Order
The Dude @ 133:
I disagree only with the idea that the media isn't doing its job. If you understand what THIS corporate media is all about you would have to agree it is doing its job all too well.
The Republican motto: Anything that does not personally benefit me is Socialist (or you fill in the pejorative term of your choice). And anyone that does not agree is a Socialist, or whatever derogatory term you want to call them. Small wonder these hypocritical, selfish pigs are going down to defeat. They represent the worst of our political system.
CoIntelPro for Pronktastic Victory Over SCLM, DIEBOLD, ESS and SEQUOIA! @ 135:
Bad idea to compare Western European-style socialism with Soviet-style starve-the-people-kill-the-kulaks Communism.
General_Rennenkampf @ 134:
Unless I did not get your sarcasm/humor, that sounded like an ignorant and condescending comment.
Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Uruguay, and Peru. All are fairly stable South American democracies. Most of them with true representative systems. And most of them became stable as soon as they were able to get rid of American inference.
bmw 528 @ 140:
I see no real evidence that they are going down to defeat. They control everything: The means of production, the electoral process and the message.
The Dude @ 142:
Ah, you're getting the hang of my posting.
General_Rennenkampf @ 134:
Watch this and do some more follow up.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144
Yesterday I watched as Bush flat-out said that the market is working because people who cannot afford gas are driving less, thereby correcting high prices with an adjustment of supply and demand. "See, it's working."
It really does not occur to him that:
1, people aren't giving up driving as an economic choice, just as seniors who eat cat food because they don't have money for real food aren't doing so because Fancy Feast just looks so darn yummy, and
2, the ability of Bush and his buddies to use massively disproportionate amounts of our resources is somehow disconnected from the realities of both the marketplace and the ideology of "supply and demand". Everything and everyone outside of their direct circle is so dehumanized to them that any destructive result of their self-serving avarice has no real meaning to them.
I think someone may someday be able to successfully argue that extreme wealth is the cause of a dangerous sociopathy, and Bush and his cronies will be proof of the danger this poses to the rest of us. They suffer from a true cognitive dissonance where the world of suffering outside of their circle is not real, but even the most trivial of desires they have must be satisfied in excess.
When Bush said Libby had "already suffered enough", he meant it, because Libby was being denied the lifestyle they "deserve". But when Bush says he feels the suffering of those whose loved ones have died in Iraq; he's lying. The troops and their families are not his family and friends, they do not matter to him. He has the right to send them to die for the profits of his friends. The lip service he pays to their families is just that: lip service. A minor duty. An annoyng Noblesse Oblige.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3p9y_OEAdc
General_Rennenkampf @ 141:
you're such a pessimist. I was only talking about the use of the terms, which make me factually and contextually correct. thank you.
Just another example of CNN being Faux lite. It's best not to watch this crap and just monitor it on the internet.
Actually, I agree with Jeffry's, it is socialism. Where I disagree with him is whether or not it's a bad thing.
Socialism in the basic principle of our United States Constitution.
Ron @ 145:
Watched that a couple years ago. There is no smear campaign corporate interests will not sink to.
Comments are closed on this entry