Obama, McCain & Socialism
Lately we have heard quite a bit about Barack Obama’s “spread the wealth” comment, which has given new ammunition to the McCain campaign and its supporters in accusing Obama of being “socialist”. As accurate as it is to describe much of Obama’s platform as socialist, to have McCain accusing Obama of supporting socialism is rather like the pot calling the kettle black.
I would remind my conservative Republican friends, who are so concerned about Obama’s socialism that they are holding their noses to vote for McCain, to bear in mind that McCain and Obama both voted for the infamous $850 billion bailout measure, which is arguably the single most socialistic (and fiscally irresponsible) piece of legislation ever to come out of Congress. Not only did both candidates vote for this legislation, but they also worked very hard behind the scenes (and publicly) to make sure the legislation would pass by lobbying individual members of Congress. McCain even threatened (or pretended) to “suspend” his campaign in order to promote “bipartisanship” to get this measure passed. That alone should make it clear that McCain is just as much a “socialist” as Obama.
It has to be pointed out that the bailout measure is itself an enormous scheme to redistribute wealth, from the prudent and responsible to the imprudent and irresponsible. It is “legal” plunder of the absolute worst sort. Of course, it isn’t lawful; it is unconstitutional. It will certainly hasten the destruction of the dollar by adding more to the national debt (which will continue to be monetized by the Federal Reserve). McCain and Obama have given their blesssing to the Bush Administration’s measures to essentially nationalize the banking sector of the economy, along with the same regarding the the mortgage industry (Fanny Mae and Feddie Mac) and other areas of the economy.
There is simply no reason to believe that either McCain (campaign rhetoric notwithstanding) or Obama would do any differently along these lines than President Bush is doing now. Why worry about a socialist President Obama when we already have a socialist President Bush? With the most dramatically socialist moves (of the fascist variety) taking place right before our very eyes, it’s time we wake up to the fact that we already have a socialistic President and Congress. This is not going to change with the next administration, regardless of which one of the two is elected. The only way out of this is to put as much pressure on members of the new Congress as possible to undo the damage and to not engage in any new damage. We can only hope that “the next Ron Paul”, Dr. B. J. Lawson, will be elected to the next Congress, and it will be imperative to recruit more people like him to run for Congress in 2010 and 2012.
It is obvious that neither Barack Obama nor John McCain have the slightest clue as what caused the economic mess we find ourselves in, or as to what we should do to get out of it. To get out of this mess, we can begin by canceling the $850 billion bailout, ending the wars overseas and all the foreign intervention, bringing the troops home and closing foreign military bases. We can then freeze all discretionary spending, and begin the transition of restoring the proper limits on the federal government imposed by the Constitution. Hopefully these measures can achieve a budget surplus, which can be accompanied by much needed tax reduction.
We can go further by insisting upon a rigorous and complete audit of the Federal Reserve, which it has never had in its 95-year history, followed by the imposition of stringent regulations on the Federal Reserve. It can be hoped that this would eventually lead to other measures to begin the transition to an asset-based currency, as the Constitution requires. Needless to say, none of these measures will be proposed or supported by Obama or McCain. The coming depression will likely last a long time.
Sadly, this election offers no choice of a Presidential candidate with any chance of winning who understands any of this. However, we can let our voices be heard by casting our votes with one of the third-party candidates who does understand this, and by becoming involved in organizations such as the Campaign For Liberty. Then the groundwork can be laid for building a Consitutionalist Congress in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

United Liberty









Socialism n. Euphemism for the common childish expression: “Hey, you got more then me! That ain’t fair. Come on, gimme part of what you got.”
So, I went and looked it up on Wikipedia:
“Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
That definition really makes Obama look like the pot calling the kettle black.
“Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.” - Thomas Jefferson
Whoops, I meant McCain looked like the pot calling the kettle black. Things get mixed up in the hunk of bolts I call my brain.
“Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.” - Thomas Jefferson
Biden’s latest gaffe — lower’s the bar on who will get a tax cut …
“What we’re saying is, that $87 billion tax break doesn’t need to go to people making an average of $1.4 million,” Biden said.
“It should go to middle-class people, people who make $150,000 a year.”
“It’s interesting how their definition of ‘rich’ has a way of creeping down,” McCain said.
“Senator Obama has made a lot of promises. First, he said people making less than $250,000 would benefit from his plan.
“Then, this weekend, he announced in an ad that if you’re a family making less than $200,000 you’ll benefit - but yesterday right here in Pennsylvania, Senator Biden said tax relief should only go to ‘middle-class people’ - people making under $150,000 a year.
“At this rate, it won’t be long before Senator Obama is right back to his vote that Americans making just $42,000 a year should get a tax increase.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10292008/news/politics/biden_blows_fuzzy_tax…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8sWT_SSQwE
Great find LouAnn — I thought at first it was a gaffe, but now it seems like he might be trying to warm up voters to extracting more $$ from upper middle income Americans rather than just “the rich”.
Anyone who votes for a candidate based on specific policy positions announced in the campaign are either extremely naive or just plain stupid. That is why I hate these guys walking around saying what they are going to do when they are elected like they are some kind of king. They seem to forget that the people’s branch might have something to say about what is enacted into law.
The ONLY proper way to measure a candidate is to look at their philosophy and their past actions and ask yourself if you can vote for the man based upon how they put their philosophy into action. If not, you should not vote for the candidate.
Applying that logic to these candidates, this is how I come out:
Obama: Basically you tax and spend liberal who believes that gov’t can solve all. He has voted that way too. Not for me.
McCain: Good luck figuring this guy’s guiding philosophy. He claims the legacy of Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan (kind of hard to reconcile those two but whatever) but votes all over the place. Basically a guy who believes that big government is the only kind of government. Give us a small tax cut and in exchange we give the government power to do whatever it likes. No thanks.
Post new comment