So despite being involved with SDS off-shoots in college, despite being an Alinskyite community organizer, despite practicing law in the pursuit of socialist aims, despite launching his political career in the home of Bill Ayers, despite his long time work with foundations and organizations seeking to further socialist aims (CAC, Woods Foundation, Joyce Foundation, the New Party), despite his consistent far left positions as an Illinois State Senator never missing an opportunity to propose or vote for any bill that involved the redistribution of wealth.... none of that qualifies as evidence he's a socialist?
No, I think the onus is actually on you to tell us why we should ignore all that and believe that his seemingly-moderate platitudes this election season prove he's no socialist.
I already fully concede to you that he will not be a socialist president - his support would evaporate amongst the American populace. Again, I further concede his ambition outweighs his political inclination. But c'mon, offer some more evidence that his inclination is not, in fact, a highly centralized social welfare state.Comment Posted By David Johnson On 9.10.2008 @ 17:02
In fact, I resent your equation of labeling Obama a socialist with equating the American Right with fascism. In terms of questionable linkage, these aren't even in the same league for myriad historical and philosophical reasons.Comment Posted By David Johnson On 9.10.2008 @ 15:28
OK, so you've explained effectively how, in practice, an Obama administration would not technically be a Socialist or Marxist government.
I propose that this is merely a matter of unfortunate reality, and that Obama's inclinations have always been towards socialism. You say he doesn't seek to nationalize industry, but this is demonstratably false based on repeated statements through his career in support of a single-payer health care system. Do you have evidence to the contrary suggesting Obama isn't a socialist other than various platitudes he's uttered since he reinvented his image circa 2004 and set his sights on higher office? His actions through life as indicated by the people he associated with and his chosen career path all indicate a lifelong devotion to all things Left.
I'll grant you that his ambition for power outweighs his desire for socialism, and therefore President Obama will not preside over a Socialist States of America. But you'll need to do more to explain why we should ignore Obama's entire life prior to 2004 and accept that he's not a socialist.
The burden of proof is on you to prove he is a socialist. As for health care, it is unfortunate but a large majority of Americans see health care as a constitutional right - a "human right" if you prefer. National health insurance will be a reality no matter who wins in November.
ed.Comment Posted By David Johnson On 9.10.2008 @ 15:25
Pages (1) :