Should RNC Chair use the ‘S’ word?
Many Republicans are upset that GOP Chairman Michael Steele seems to have an aversion to calling President Obama and the Democrats “socialists.” I have mixed emotions on the issue — and not because it’s an inaccurate description — but we’ll get to that in a second.
From the Washington Times:
Republican state party leaders are rebelling against new Republican National Committee Chairman Michael S. Steele for failing to dub President Obama and the Democrats as “socialists.” And the rebels insist that the label matters.
Even though Mr. Steele has called his Democratic adversaries “collectivists,” at least 16 state leaders say the term lacks the pejorative punch needed to sway public opinion and want all 168 members of the Republican National Committee to debate and vote on it.
It is the first time in memory that a sitting national leader of the Republican Party has faced a public challenge over his ideological leadership by conservative members of his own national committee.
Should Steele refer to Obama and the Democrats as “socialists”? I don’t ask the question in a “would it be impolite” sort of way, either. Who cares about that — it’s a struggle for the future of the country — which is why throwing the “s” word around in our current political and social climate needs to be carefully considered.
If you believe polling data (a recent poll found that 68% of people think that polling data is inaccurate, so take this for what it’s worth), only 53% of Americans think that capitalism is better than socialism. That’s a pretty close tipping-point. In other words, we could be approaching the time when calling Barack Obama a “socialist” becomes nothing more than positive image campaign advertising for… Barack Obama. So there’s that to consider.
Look for those percentages to shift and for some who were tempted to flirt with socialism for the first time to come sprinting to the Republican Party after discovering how much more everything costs when it’s free (to paraphrase P.J. O’Rourke), but the GOP can’t afford to wait that long, and neither can America.
That said, of course Steele should refer to Obama and many Democrats as socialists. There are many conflicts within the GOP as to how to proceed, but I think all Republicans would agree that dishonesty should have no place in the party platform.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Nancy Pelosi Explains Why Obama Flip-Flopped on Super PACs
February 9, 2012 10:08 PM by Doug Powers
50 Comments
Report: Solyndra Sold Assets Cheap to Entity with Close Ties to Investors
February 9, 2012 10:08 AM by Doug Powers
49 CommentsSteny Hoyer: The Fact is You Don’t Need a Budget
February 8, 2012 03:27 PM by Doug Powers
74 Comments
Former Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage
February 7, 2012 03:40 PM by Doug Powers
75 Comments
How to Make a Liberal Politician Stand Up Against Intrusive Government
February 6, 2012 04:28 PM by Doug Powers
95 Comments
Middle Class Payroll Tax Cut Extension Comes Courtesy of Mortgage Fees on Home Buyers
February 6, 2012 01:36 PM by Doug Powers
35 CommentsHiring Spree in NYC
February 1, 2012 02:47 PM by Doug Powers
43 CommentsJerry Brown: C’mon, California’s High Speed Rail Will Be Way Cheaper Than $100 Billion
January 30, 2012 10:35 PM by Doug Powers
132 Comments
Mr. and Mrs. Cranky Pants
January 27, 2012 10:35 AM by Michelle Malkin
138 Comments
Categories: Barack Obama,Politicians
Pundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"JustOneMinute
» We Hear From The Department Of Good Ideas And False Choices
Maybe he’s afraid that pointing his finger @ Obama would mean 4 fingers pointing back @ the RNC?
Besides why call a communist a socialist?
quick definitions for those who need a refresher:
socialism = you have 2 cows; the government takes the cows and gives them to your neighbors
communism = you have 2 cows; the government takes the cows and shoots you
capitalism = you have 2 cows; you sell one cow and buy a bull
Use of strong, descriptive terms is called for, and Steele needs to show a bit of guts.
I don’t think that “socialism” is correct as a descriptor of Obamanomics. They are more in line with fascist economic theory.
But I do recognize you can loose a debate with too fine an argument. People have to get what you’re saying, and very few understand it when you speak of fascist economics.
Socialism works (to scare people who need to be scared…not for anything else), and it should be employed by Obama’s (and Bush’s) economic opponents.
Yes lets stop pretending anything but Socialist are in charge of the Country. The deeper we sink, the more the population will see that socialism is the cause so they will equate the present state of unemployment, and foreclosures i.e. homelessness to “SOCIALISM” which they should. This started with the Sub Prime Loans bubble bursting last September. A manufactured “Social Engineering” program designed by Progressives aka Socialist started by Jimmy Carter CRA. Let their chickens come home to roost. The RNC can’t figure this out? They really are in disarray. Barack H Obama sued Citibank for not loaning to people who couldn’t afford mortgages – sub prime loans…who is responsible for the present state of the economy? They are running the Government. Should the RNC use the S word is this really a discussion they are having?
Well it is about time.
Perhaps that is because the RNC has not hhad a very powerful message or anone in recent years who can get it across like Reagan could.
My take on it would be to ask “what would Reagan do?” I think you all know the answer to that one.
I’d prefer to call them s***heads, but socialists works pretty well too.
re distribution of wealth which Obama has stated he believes in- is Socialism. My question would be is the Republican Party this diffused? OR is this question coming from the RINOS in the party?
Too many socialists have infiltrated the Repub party. Time to clean house NOW!
Steele needs to get tough within his own party before he will have credibility calling out the Dems for the socialists/commies they are.
Fascist economics = you own two cows. Meaning, you hold the title. The state tells you how you use the cows, what to feed them, and takes virtually all the milk. But you own the cows, sort of in trust.
Maybe the number 53% is misleading is it a polling or a sampling? It does make a difference. Who got Polled, and are they really representative of the majority of the country?
A style of government in which the rulers demand unquestioning obedience from the ruled. Traditionally, ‘authoritarians’ have argued for a high degree of determination by governments of belief and behaviour and a correspondingly smaller significance for individual choice
For anyone who would like to understand the difference between
fascist economics
and
socialist economics
http://rags.blogtownhall.com/
Good to see you blogging here Doug, I surfed over from your blog.
What I DO expect him to do is stand up for Conservative Republican candidates. I DO expect him to be strong and speak out. It’s a cryin’ shame that democrats are more afraid of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Sarah Palin than of Michael Steele. That shows who IS standing up, being strong, and speaking out. And who is trying to just get along.
Absolutely, and neither should mis-characterizing or mis-representing the facts.
To that end, aren’t Social Security and Farm Subsidies a form of ‘Socialism’? To be consistent these programs among others must be challenged, too. Otherwise calling anyone a ‘Socialist’ falls empty and hollow.
We don’t need empty and hollow, it is duplicitous and hypocritical. A far more nuanced arguement is necessary.
That arguement should be about HOW we do what we do, and not that it is done. Because the reality is that levels of ‘Socialism’ do exist, and Republicans support them.
It is not the WHAT, but the HOW.
Alinsky…..name it, blah blah blah
GOP doesn’t seem to be able to recognize a golden opportunity when one is staring them smack dab in the face. And I am not talking about paying lip service to conservatism … I’m talking an about-face, double time.
Americans have had enough and if they cannot find refuge in either party they’ll look elsewhere. Wouldn’t you (Steele) prefer if they were looking towards your camp?
Collectivists is appropriate to use but I don’t’ believe the term is as widely known as say, socialism. Get a clue, GOP.
Leadership means standing up for what you believe and supporting those you’re leading. Weakness is not a good trait when proclaiming to be a leader. Frankly the current Republican Party leadership is not any better than what zero is showing to the rest of the world. That is, no leadership at all. A photo op opportunity does not make you a leader.
“The state should retain supervision and each property owner should consider himself appointed by the state. It is his duty not to use his property against the interests of others among his own people. This is the crucial matter. The Third Reich will always retain its right to control the owners of property.” That was A. Hitler’s formulation of “social responsibility”. Barney Frank would approve.
from http://rags.blogtownhall.com/
I think Janet, and the others are exhibiting a kind of blackmailing of the American public, when they make their pronouncements (putting American Military Veterans on Terrorist watch list) message don’t attend Tea Partys. Barack Obama said, at the G20 to the NATO countries, you need to contribute more troops because you all are more vulnerable then we are (The French Declined) not afraid of this U.S.Government….He made a statement to Democrats in Congress getting ready to vote on Bills “We’re Keeping Score Bro” This is Chicago style politics, and YES they can be voted out. They are behaving very juvenile, this is how children behave on the play ground. Who here is impressed? So we are going to get all politics, all the time NO Governing of the Country just political posturing. This isn’t impressive, and it seems that a Government that is hostile to it’s own citizens, needs to do some inner reflecting. They need a Public Relations Department full time, and advising them of how their posturing looks to the Public at large.
When I see The President of the U.S.A come on TV and he reminds me of a PSA Announcer, there needs to be some one in charge of his image, that gets it! The office of the President of the U.S. has weight and gravity, I am not witnessing presently. Do they really want Barack Obama to come off as a Beta Male?
Personally, I think the technical term “assetholes” is more accurate and effective. It also will appeal to our gay brethren.
socialism, collectivism, co dependency….what did Barack Obama’s father die of? Anyone, Bueller, Bueller..
They should keep playing the tape of that Democratic Liberal Fascist on Fox this morning telling us she doesn’t want HER money going to pay for FAT people.
This is the future of this country left in the hands of the democrats. FORCE National Medical Care, make US pay for it, then tell shut us OFF if we don’t comply to their view of health.
What is next. We won’t pay for YOUR children. We won’t pay for those who REFUSE to join a union. We won’t pay for Republican health care. Get the picture.
Barack Obama wrote that his father “had been selected by Kenyan leaders and … In 1982, Obama Senior was killed in an alcohol-related car accident in Kenya, …
Obama is a Marxist, that a couple of steps ahead of a socialist.
DREAMS OF HIS FATHER INDEED!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-dependency
Codependence is a term which has been defined variously. In general, the codependent is understood to be a person who perpetuates the alcohol or drug dependence of someone close to them in a way that hampers recovery.[1] This can be done through direct control over the dependent, by making excuses for their dysfunctional behavior or relieving them of the consequences of the dependence. In an act called enabling, this can have negative social and health consequences for both parties.[2]
Click the link check out the symptoms.
Conservatives have made attempts to reform Social Security in terms of privatizing it. Like any other socialistic program, its users become dependent, and entrenched, regardless of political affiliation. I don’t mind doing my part to support the previous generations that have sustained mine. However, in terms of a retirement income, I am not expecting anything from my fellow citizens and we are preparing accordingly.
The socialistic mindset must go!
I find it amazing.. the Republicans haven’t really put any effort in to fighting a political campaign since Reagan defeated Mondale. The fact that the RNC is now waffling over whether or not to call a democrat a “socialist”?!?
Democrats are, based on the stated platform of the Party, socialist. I agree with many here who see their policy as facist – I think facism is as far to the right as the left will allow the Party to go. Left to it’s core values, Democrats straddle the line between Socialism and very soft line Communism.
This again shows the unwillingness to fight of the RNC. They seem to have a long term strategy of allowing the Dems to screw up the country sooooooooooo badly that they can win by default. i.e.: Kennedy/Johnson – Created Vietnam and utilized it as an excuse to destabilize the dollar, take it off the gold standard and float it on the world market – hello 21st century economic crisis, was cured by Nixon who got us out of Vietnam and stabilized the economy enough for Carter to completely screw it up again – 21% prime rate anyone? That was fixed by 8 years of Reagan – which was tanked by Clinton so fast you couldn’t see his lips move.
The point of this shaggy dog is that the RNC could wait until we are so screwed that even the MSM gives in. That time WILL come. But, at the level of deviance that Ole Blue Lips is giving away the store, we may not recover.
All I am asking of the RNC is to GROW A PAIR AND FIGHT.
Your ammunition is handed to you every day. Talk Radio and the Internet can pick it our easy enough. Us regular folks can see it a mile away. Why can’t the RNC simply utilize the information in a way that is effective – or even try.
I could rant all day about this.
The state lets you take all the cost and risk, and shoots you if the cows don’t produce.
They’re all synonyms for slavery at one level or another. Even oppressive taxes (as I think we have here, and are bound for more) are a form of slavery: compulsory labor for the benefit of someone else.
Because of the tipping point, 3rd party is the answer. We need a strong big C conservative party. The Dems and the GOP are interchangeable. Time to flush the terlet, as Archie would say.
Speaking of Socialism, the House is pushing to fst track Obama’s Government Health care using the “fast-track” budget procedure that would make it a fillibuster proof bill and limit debate.
If universal health care is soooo great then why should the Libs fear debate on it? Not to mention, was it not the Liberals leading the charge a few years back against what was going on at Walter Reed (which is a prime example of government healthcare).
I say, let’s call a spade a spade.
Obama is a socialist. Plain and simple. Now, the GOP should not only use the term, but they had very well better have alternatives to everything on which they call him.
Otherwise, it’s empty banter, and America is sick of that.
I agree with many here who see their policy as facist – I think facism is as far to the right as the left will allow the Party to go.I think we make a terrible mistake by allowing other people to define our terms.
People on the American Right have NOTHING to do with fascism. Rather, they are people who believe in individual liberty, small, responsible government, and free-market capitalism.
People on the American Left follow the same urges that Socialists, Fascists, and Communists do: individuals are subservient to the collective; powerful, centralized government; planned economies.
The Nazi Party was the NATIONAL SOCIALIST PARTY.
Benoite Mussolini was the head of the ITALIAN SOCIALIST PARTY before evolving his FASCIST ideology.
They are joined at the hip.
Y’all do realize that Americans remember what real socialism was, and how Democrats are nothing like the Politburo, and that when people hear these absurd comparisons, they just think you’re a joke, right?
(I couldn’t be more thrilled that your answer is no.)
that polling data is misleading. Rasmussen explained it on FoxNews. the people were not specifically asked about socialism or capitalism. Rasmussen said that the people favorably came out in support of the free market. there’s a little more to it than just the superficial headline.
True, but the Fascist WERE Socialist. The two great Socialist leaders in pre WW l Europe were indeed Lenin and Mussolini. The only split between them was that neither was willing to be subservient to the other. Hitler’s National Socialism was based on Mussolini. Hitler’s and the NAZIs fear of Bolshevism was based on their fear of Russia and the Slavs-not ideological. During the short period of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact American Leftist were all a ga ga over Hitler ending only with the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941.
That somehow there is a big split between Fascism and Socialism was strictly an invention of FDR to justify allying the US with Stalin. The Mussolini-Lenin split merely morphed into a Stalin-Hitler duel on who would rule Europe. And so we get Obama-Fascist/Socialist and maybe a wee touch of Mullahism thrown in- but he is just getting along with his homies.
No doubt about it, we have our work cut out for us but if you think we are going to just slink off into obscurity and accept the ruination of the US … you’ve got another thing coming. Laugh now.
Also, I’m waiting with baited breath for your denials that what Obama and his administration have planned is anything but socialism. I’m sorry but your pronouncement about “real socialism” doesn’t quite cut the mustard. Defend the indefensible. Go on.
Politburo–a featured department of COMMUNIST states.
And, every day, with the Department of Hometown Suppression, et.al, THE ONE’s opening of the prospect of show-trials of members of the previous administration, etc., we come closer to an American Politburo.
Michael Steele is the wrong man for the job.
At this time, conservatives should be in the socialists’ faces, building grassroots, defining the differences using every means possible.
We should forcing the media to deal with us on our terms.
Our message needs to get out.
In times of crisis, a real leader has usually appeared.
We are in a crisis and we are at risk in many ways.
Sometimes I feel like all is lost. I just read on Drudge that the largest %age ever feels we’re going in the right direction.
I refuse to give up, though.
I couldn’t agree more, MtsEdge. It was Bush who said he had to “abandon” capitalism to “save it”. It’s hard to build credibility with that as part of your history.
Another thing the party needs to do is back Toomey in his bid to oust Specter, unlike last election!!
Are you listening, Michael?
That’s a good point. I’m for calling BHO et al Socialists. But before the RNC starts putting labels on things, they better be prepared to get ahead of the media backlash (using Soc. Security etc.) to make conservatives look uncaring…(I remember Gore using Medicare as a weapon during his campaign.)
BTW…has anyone asked BHO what he is??
The problem is not the terms we use, the problem is the terms are not defined. I am sure some listen to Hannity’s radio show. On Thursday’s he does a segment “Man on the street” where he does a line of questioning that clearly lays out a Karl Marx ideology. I have only heard a few that agree with each question and when asked if they heard of Karl Marx they don’t even know who he is. Then when told that they agree with Marx, then they say well maybe I am a Marxist totally unaware that the U.S. won the cold war defeating Marxist’s. Most on the right take the time to understand terms and words but not all. Where I think we could do better is defining the terms we use. Another example is i don’t think very many people understand the difference between deficit spending and national debt. I bet if we ask, most would think they are the same thing.
But, one of the things that makes fascist economic theory so dangerously seductive…and different from socialism…is that the owners of capital get to nominally keep it. They control the property, but the STATE controls its use…or the owner.
“Socialists” is an accurate term , to be sure. I also think “liar”, “deceiver” and “seditious” also work well.
No RedStateSatist you are the joke-but on the Left and NOT Right, right? If you and yours do manage to get one party control you will set up something like the Politburo–perhaps the Peoples Democratic National Congress? You would not want to keep the Old Dead White Racist Patriarchy names would you?
“First European Style Social Democrats THEN All Power to the Soviet” RedStateSatist?
Having government play a larger role than conservatives prefer is not socialism. It’s actually more like the America before George W. Bush, and I don’t remember anyone saying we had a socialist government then.
When the Democrats confiscate the homes of all landowners, I’ll hear you out. If they raise taxes to what they were during the 1990s, the period of the greatest prosperity in American history, that’s not socialism.
Oh…I thought the “s” word was sycophant.
It is time for both strong words and strong actions. The left is more than willing to use any words and apparently any actions, including an abuse of the law and the political process, to condemn average Americans. And if you disagree with that just look what has been happening to Carrie Prejean, returning veterans and those who attended a Tea Party.
Obama is not suggesting that the government OWN GM. He isn’t nationalizing all the stock in private hands.
He’s simply following fascist economics, and MANDATING what GM will do. So, people are free to own stock, so long as they conform to the collective’s dictates of how it is used.
Arizona is absolutely correct. If you need more proof, keep a close watch on today’s news reports of BofA’s CEO Ken Lewis’ charges that Bernanke forbade him from reporting to his shareholders how toxic and bankrupt the forced Merrill Lynch acquisition truly is. In the spirit of disclosure and accountability, the government issues gag orders and “profit” reporting by fiat.
Do you think this may have something to do with it?
If that isn’t fascism, I don’t know what is.
Well, he could say that Obama and company are against Freedom, but then he’d be describing the Republican Party too.
I agree with a small few of the people here that what Obama and company are doing isn’t really socialism; it’s fascism. They may ultimately be heading for socialism, but their rhetoric is not overtly there yet (except for health care).
What we’re really heading for is a showdown between the people who would prefer the government to generally leave the people alone – and yes, that includes things that you may disagree with – and the people who want government to socially engineer our society. What most Republicans have been unable to get through their thick skulls is that when you concentrate power in Washington it will ultimately be used against you. It’s as predictable and consistent as the law of gravity. There’s this constant tug of people saying “but… but… but… if we only had the right people in charge we could do this right!” If this sounds exactly like the Democrat’s line on the economy then … that’s because it is. It has the exact same basis in philosophy.
You can never count on the “right people” being in power. Sooner or later you’re going to get an Obama or a Clinton or an FDR in place that wants to tinker with everything. The only long-term solution is to limit the amount of power in Washington, whether you like it or not.
There is no Republicans Party anymore so why do we keep bringing them up?
Why should “Republicans” care about the socialist issue? I mean, they’re as much into socialism as anyone. The only difference between them and the Democrats is that they are merely socialist in the same way any moderate European is, while the Democrats are oligarchs who want to crush the common citizen’s presumed constitutional rights.
Moreover, the “Republicans” are as much into @ss-kissing and shoulder-rubbing with the enemies of this country as Obama is. The nation I was born into does not exist anymore. There ARE no politicians with any chance of being elected out there, because the power structure of both parties do not want the United States as it was instituted, that is, a nation that was founded upon the precepts of freedom and liberty and a government established to protect those precepts.
In the meantime, I think folks need to do some proper comparison between what Obama is doing and what has been done in the past, because he is NOT handling the economy as a classical Marxist or Stalinist drone. His policies are much closer to those of a classical Fascist in the mode of Benito Mussolini or Adolf Hitler, because he is maintaining the corporate structure, which is anathema to the communist model.
Fascism is socialism with the illusion of incentive.
One of the saddest moments in recent history. This is a good example of chickens coming home to roost, as there were many warning rumblings about Bush’s lack of conservative credentials when he ran against Gore. As I have stated before, he was more of an LOTE, b/c of fear of a Gore presidency.
I agree with your point that the purpose of the RNC should be to back TRUE conservatives, and they must first RECOGNIZE them. If the RNC really wants to win elections, they need to stop playing the role of “beta male” – (h/t another poster on this site).
Here’s a fact—
Since the late 1920s-1930s FASCIST economic has been a prevalent component of American politics.
A remarkable number of people in FDR’s administration, American industry, and the population at large were enamored of fascist economics.
Pre-WW II Winston Churchill thought fascist economics was a swell idea.
Later, when fascist states became the bad guys, the allure of fascist economic policy did not go away.
It has been an undercurrent…always…regardless of who was President, who controlled Congress, etc. BECAUSE it is so powerfully seductive, and because no self-preserving politician would advocate outright socialism.
Funny, I don’t recall our government taking over the country’s banking system, along w/ the auto industry, w/ common stock before the Obama administration came to power.
Do you mean like National Socialism? Yes, they were really believable when they told all those people in the Re-Education camps, “Take off your clothes, and step into the showers. Do not worry, we will take care of all your needs after you are ‘cleansed.’”
Yeah, I remember…who could forget? Oh, right…the U.S.’s liberal leadership, and the Iranian’s socialist leadership.
“Those who forget the lessons of history, are doomed to repeat it.”
Repeatedly doing the same things that don’t work, is insane. Believing that those newly in charge will command a different outcome, when nothing else has changed, is stupidity, naivete, or worse.
I believe that Obamism should be called fascism, not socialism, not because it is entirely accurate, but because it is the closest of the three possible alternatives: socialism, communism, and fascism. Obamism has some, but not all, of the attributes of all three. While socialism and communism are left-wing ideologies, Obamism, like fascism, has elements of both left-wing and right-wing ideologies. Like socialism and communism, Obamism believes in a centralized government that plans and controls the economy, determines what the “common good” is, and seeks to eradicate class divisions by “spreading the wealth around.” However, unlike socialism and communism, Obamism mirrors fascism in that does not mandate “collective ownership,” but it maintains the façade of private ownership. Of course, in Obamism, like fascism, the freedom to utilize private property is allowed by the state only to the extent that it is used for the “common good,” again as defined by the state. While socialism and communism usually cause economic collapse (think Soviet Union and Cuba), fascism, like Obamism, often arises out of economic collapse (think Hitler and Mussolini). Like all three, Obamism seeks to maintain control through censorship, albeit with a completely willing accomplice in the form of the MSM. So, rather then create a new “ism” (Obamism) and cause possible confusion (like liberals who are ashamed of their liberalism and want to be called progressives), lets call it something that the American people can more readily identify, fascism.
That is actually very close to the mark.
And the illusion is what makes it so dangerous.
At the base of Communism, Socialism, and Fascism, they are ANTI-liberal (classical liberalism)…or anti-individual, anti-entrepreneur, anti-freedom notions.
A good discussion on the similarities and differences between Fascism and Socialism.
Both are statist and anti-individual.
Obama is probably better described as a fascist, but with the dumbing down of America with regards to politics in the public schools and universities, many, probably most Americans see “fascism” as extreme conservatism, and would not understand the connection.
Exactly my point in my first post on this thread.
You can make arguments that are true, and loose the debate because you lost your audience’s ability to comprehend the terms you employ.
I think STEELE is showing as much GUTS as OL’ JUAN did in the election… He never used the “S” word either, beneath the dignity of the CAMPAIGN… Never brought up B. HUSSEIN full name, beneath the dignity of the CAMPAIGN… never mentioned his attending a church for 20 years that preached VENOM and HATE for this COUNTRY, beneath the dignity of the CAMPAIGN… Never mentioned his association with the likes of AYERS and REZKO, beneath the dignity of the CAMPAIGN… Well OL’ JUAN ran a VERY DIGNIFIED CAMPAIGN and he is NOT the POTUS… Oh, by the way, he will soon NOT be the SENATOR form ARIZONA either, for that would be beneath the DIGNITY OF MY VOTE!!!
The uninterrupted march of fascist economic in the U.S. since the 1930s is one of the BIG structural reasons…
we have to think outside the box, and
STARVE THE BEAST
Steele and the National Republican party are a waste of time and in bed with Obama. Concentrate on the state level and take our Constitution back state by state. That is where we will win the Civil War. Washington is already lost and the Republicans there lie happily at the feet of their new masters. Forget them. Concentrate on your state legislators.
If only that was the case. Health care only started to skyrocket when the government started paying some of the bills, but the clamor is for more government, not less. I deeply fear the complacency of the baby boomers led to a generation of people who honestly believe that they need big government to control their lives.
When we were kids, “socialist” was 4 letter word. Now we’re openly mocked when we denounce the philosophy.
I am really afraid for the future of America.
EXACTAMUNDO!!!” But it is much more vast than simply political dumbing down. It is creating and nurturing an atmosphere of hate to confront opposing political viewpoints. Look how those in the administration, and even more so in Congress, want to go after the previous administration and it’s advisors and prosecute them. This is pure hatred, and has nothing to do with “justice!”
Should the “S” word be used?
ANSWER: “If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks……
And well you should be…
we are at a tipping point, or a decision-point.
We cannot pretend otherwise.
We either ACT, effectively in this extremity…
or we watch as events march to a point when VASTLY greater costs will be required to change what is wrong…if it can be changed.
So another poll.
I always take the polling data with very little truth. Remember those RNC polls that were so written that there was only one outcome? It is like “what is the results we want, so here are the questions.”
No, as others have noted, it’s fascism. And it’s only like America from around the time of Woodrow Wilson through Carter, and briefly during Clinton I – when Democrats controlled the legislature and/or had like-minded presidents (party irrelevant).
Taxes are relative. They were much higher than that during Clinton I, when the Democrats forced through the largest tax increase in American history, promptly tanking the economy. The prosperity of which you brag happened after the advent of a Republican Congress, which forced through (most notably) welfare reform and capital gains tax cuts, dropping the top capital gains rate from the earned income level to a fixed 20%. That’s what kicked off the prosperity of which you are so proud. Bush and the Republicans doubled down on that after the Greenspan crash by cutting rates again, once again kicking off a spurt of growth, masked to some degree by the aftermath of 9/11 and the wars. Returning tax levels to what they were in the ’90′s is still a tax increase and would still have major negative impact on the market and the economy. As will his inflationary printing and spending money by the trillions.
This has been defined to death but:
Capitalism is a government that leaves business alone.
Communism is a Government that owns all Business.
Facism is a Government that controls all business.
This is why the Trains were always on time in Italy (be late and be executed).
Thus, in the USA, we have been living with a somewhat Facist style of government since the end of World War 1.
Yes, many politicians in the 20′s and 30′s thought very highly of Facism. Many thought the Nazis were absolutely right and an even greater number (including FDR) thought the Soviets had hit the nail on the head. Until the true horror of World War 2 had hit home and we later saw the even more atrocious horrors of Communism (sorry Mr. Lefty, your hero Stalin murdered more people than Hitler – don’t get me started on Mao and his buddies in Cambodia) did we realize that the execution of these concepts were truly evil. As with all utopian ideals, they read very well on paper but the absolute power they allow for corrupts absolutely.
That is where Obama is leading us – call it what you want but the steps he is taking are a path to Socialist totalitarianism. We are already at the point where speaking against Party Policy makes you a criminal. The appointment of “Czars” (a wholly unconstitutional breach of checks and balances) is another step in the march and the destabilization of the economic forces which power capitalism is the coup de grace.
The answer is, in my opinion, not with a third party. It is simply with making people aware of the truth. In the early ’90′s it was Rush. Back then, we didn’t have so many ways to obtain information and Rush became what he is because people tend to recognize the truth if it is placed in front of them. We can do the same today but the RNC must be willing to fight. If they can’t or won’t, THEN they should have the class to call it a day and fold the party.
Here’s an example—
Social Security
Criticized as a socialist program.
But it was classical fascism, and here’s how you can see it…
Each payer into the SS system was provided the fiction that their money was in a trust that belonged to them.
It was a lie, of course. But it provided the illusion of ownership…but only at the good pleasure of the collective government.
Given what Janet DHS stated about the terrorist entering the country from Canada -see our real enemies CANADIANS
I have to take away from that statement that Janet considers the Canadian’s Socialist Lite, not good enough for this Country LOL! Not Pink Enough Aay!
But they won’t…indeed, CAN’T.
People with power do not relinquish it because they should.
It has to be taken.
STARVE THE BEAST!
conservative in europe: the reason your list doesn’t catch on is that communism and fascism are totalitarian ideologies. Capitalism is an economic tool that lies at the heart of a successful free market democracy. Democracy is not a prerequisite for capitalism. After all, Marx wrote “Das Kapital”, not “Das People”.
Capitalism works well only when well-regulated. The level of regulation is determined by how ethical the participants are which history has taught is, not at all. So long as fear and greed can be efficiently regulated, (Glass Steagall Act and Sherman Anti-Trust Act e.g.) we can expect a prosperous and innovative free society. Today, we have a corrupt, and entrenched, fascist system.
Michael Steele should only use the “S” word if he knows what he’s talking about and can defend it. I don’t have anything against Steele, but he doesn’t strike me as a particularly deep fellow, and I hate seeing him wither when he’s challenged on something that should be simple. He seems more like a political creature rather than a person with deep convictions. The left is filled with shallow political hacks and whores, the right needs to present a compelling alternative.
The economy of the 1990s- the minor recession that the Clintonistas hammered GHWB on was already ending by the election, and the incredible lie, “The worst economy since the Great Depression” was especially outrageous, since the end of the Carter term was far worse. But the media was already biased then.
Clinton had twelve years of Reaganomics behind him (well, Bush 41 wasn’t purely Reaganomics, but close enough) to strengthen the core of the economy, and after the Hillary Care debacle, Clinton had a Republican Congress to restrain him from imposing the disasterous policies he might have otherwise chosen. Balancing the budget was easy, requiring no sacrifice from the bloated bureaucracy, when the military budget was slashed. (BTW, then the same Demonrats blast Rumsfeld for saying ‘you go to war with the army you got’, after they had gutted the military.)
Part of the apparent strength of the Clinton economy was the dot com bubble, and the economy was already headed for recession by Summer 2000. The recession officially began in March 2001, when GWB had been in the White House for a little over a month.
A huge difference between Clinton and Obama, besides the fact that Clinton had experience as governor and was politically astute enough to utilize ‘triangulation’, taking positions between the Far Left of his party and the GOP, was that Clinton did not have complete control over Congress, even when both houses were majority Democrat, and there were still a few Zel Miller type moderates.
Obama has a Congress as left-wing and anti-American as he is, evidenced by the 49 so called ‘Blue Dog’ Democrats who claim to be moderate, voting for Porkulus with only 11 exceptions, and has a filibuster proof majority. Obama will get everything he wants the next two years, and it will be hard to reverse the damage he will do, both to the economy and our national security.
Consummate bullspit.
No it isn’t. That’s socialism. Communism, at least in the classical sense, is redistribution of income, expressed as from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs, and in Marx’s fantasy world, in the absence of government (“communes”, get it?)
I think we should be calling a Socialist a Socialist – and taking every opportunity to clarify the definition in the minds of our audience.
I wouldn’t worry too much about that 53% Rammussen poll – if you look, it shows more than just economic preference.
– MuscleDaddy
Unless he is stopped by some EFFECTIVE…outside-the-box…
response by individuals, acting in concert…
demanding that their individual rights may not be destroyed by the “collective good”.
“All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men (and women) do nothing.”
I would add…nothing effective.
I have suggested that a tax boycott would be effective.
STARVE THE BEAST. Deny it its life-blood. Refuse to be eaten.
BTW- the development of possible ‘show trials’ in Congress and/or prosecution for Bush Administration officials for keeping this country from being attacked again-
I see that as a very bad sign.
The new president and his administration have never, ever targetted the prior administration over politics. I think some Nixon people were prosecuted after Ford took over, but those were obstruction and perjury charges.
The reason- what comes around, goes around. I can recall Bush defending the right of the Clintonites to keep meeting notes and the such secret, supporting the claim of executive priviledge.
But if one is reasonably confident the other party will never again assume power, and return the favor of Congressional hearings of misdeeds during the Obama Administration, or conducting criminal investigations of policy decisions, then it is fine to throw a bone to the vindictive MoveOn.org wing of the party and drag Cheney and Rummy, Ashcroft and Gonzales, even Bush himself, before a Leahy led Congressional show trial. Or frog-march Bush DoJ attornies before DC juries to face war crimes charges.
I am not sure that Obama intends to step down, or if he does intend to serve only 8 years, I believe he is confident we are going to the system that ruled for 70 years when the Partido Revolucionario Institucional was the governing party in Mexico, the outgoing President hand picks his successor, because through vote fraud and intimidation, that party is certain to win.
That would be “Das Volk”. I’m afraid I disagree. It takes a democratic society, with its participatory government, to have capitalism. Otherwise, government inevitably imposes its will and you have some form of fascism. The industrial revolution would not have occurred in an authoritarian society, because there’s no profit motive on the grand scale. Civilization advanced in only baby steps for centuries prior to the Magna Carta and subsequent expansion of not only participatory government, but the advent of the concept of private ownership of property. Marx had it all wrong, to the surprise of only his adherents. His enemy wasn’t capitalism, it was the authoritarian state – whether a king or a dictator (or a bunch of leftwing crazies like we have now). He just didn’t think it through.
Libertarians did. After all what is public education?
On April 23rd, 2009 at 12:31 pm, Ed Mahmoud abu al-Kahoul said:
I am not sure that Obama intends to step down, or if he does intend to serve only 8 years, I believe he is confident we are going to the system that ruled for 70 years when the Partido Revolucionario Institucional was the governing party in Mexico, the outgoing President hand picks his successor, because through vote fraud and intimidation, that party is certain to win.
You really give the Chicago Folks way too much credit, they are not 10 feet tall but they probably appreciate you thinking they are more of a threat, then they really are. Objects in your rear view mirror may appear larger then they actually are.
Leave the paranoia to Janet Napolitano, we need to fear returning American Military Veterans, and Canadians TOO FUNNY she is one of the bright ones in the Obama Administration. These people can’t get their act together but they are going to bring the Republic down?
GOP = Gutless Old Pinheads
The time to “play nice” is over – it was never an issue with the lefties to begin with.
As long as Steele – or another who shares his views of the world (and party) – is in charge, I will never contribute a single penny to the RNCC, and have written (yet again) to tell them that.
In 4 short months, these scumbags of the left – call them what you will, I prefer Marxists – have gutted this country and turned it into a semi third world craphole. Enough! It’s time to use the tactics they have used for generations and make NO apologies for it!
BTW, you veterans here – and law enforcement as well – I strongly recommend you take a look at the Oath Keepers blog. It will be an eye-opener.
Yeah. I hope Steele starts using the “f” word. It will help the republican party gain credibility. It’s right on point, and not at all irrational. If you compare Obama to some of the Fascist dictators of the past 100 years, you’ll see that there’s no difference.
Agreed. Socialism is too weak of a term. High five.
No, it wasn’t close enough. Bush ’41 was no supply sider. After promising no tax increases, he allowed the Democrats to talk him into a huge tax increase which promptly caused an economic pullback, and is primarily what gave us Clinton in the first place.
Laree:
Obama has yet to rule out Congressional show trials or even criminal investigations/prosecutions of Bush administration people over what amounts to policy difference.
If one accepts the possibility that the other party will return to power someday, one doesn’t start playing such a dangerous game.
BTW, you have heard Obama is taking the census from Commerce and putting it directly under Rahm Emmanuel’s control? You’ve heard of ACORN, its links to fraudulent voter registration, and the funding it will be receiving from Obama’s budget?
You know Obama launched his political career from the home of Bernadine Dohrn and William Ayers, violent revolutionaries, and that Obama served on boards with Ayers?
You are aware that Ayers is reported to have discussed the possibility of mass executions of capitalists and counter-revolutionaries in America when the communists took power?
Before you dismiss talk of a permanent one party system run by the Democrats as black helicopter paranoia, maybe you should look into Obama and his connections a little more closely.
This isn’t just a well-founded concern…
it is obvious that this is the intent of this crew.
NOTHING in this administration has remained unpoliticized.
The CENSUS has been made a political tool.
You and I are subsidizing ACORN at breathtaking levels.
A mandatory “public service” bill, backed by billions of dollars, has been signed into law.
All forms of education that threaten the public school monopoly are under the gun.
We have seen election after election stolen in the last two decades…BLATANTLY stolen.
95% of American tax-payers have just been given money belonging to the people who earned it…or to our children and childrens’ children. A cynical pay-off for future votes.
This isn’t even debatable.
#92- Close enough for purpose of the discussion. I didn’t want to go into the whole ‘Conservative Lite’ thing that seemed to affect both President Bush’s.
He doesn’t have to call it anything but Obamanomics. What he does need to do is start educating people about what it entails and what the results will be.
Are the people in charge Socialists?
Here is the definition straight from the dictionary.
1) Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2) The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
Slam dunk on this one.
…which could be the reason people like RSS and lgm are so attracted to it. No need to think, just use the latest talking points.
Welcome back Doug.
Don’t look at me- Kudrow uses the term statist corporatism.
(sorry if the following question has already been posed above…)
Based upon MM’s statement:
OPEN QUESTION:
Just what, then, would be a “more effective” soundbite-description for such Socialits?