Another Socialist: Obama’s not socialist
Last week, the Washington Post ran a column by their resident socialist Harold Meyerson easing our fears of President Barack Obama’s political persuation by declaring that “he’s not one of us”. Today, they find another socialist to confirm Meyerson’s assessment. Billy Wharton allays our fears with typical misinformation;
A national health insurance system as embodied in the single-payer health plan reintroduced in legislation this year by Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), makes perfect sense to us. That bill would provide comprehensive coverage, offer a full range of choice of doctors and services and eliminate the primary cause of personal bankruptcy — health-care bills. Obama’s plan would do the opposite.
Never mind that any intrusion by the government into private health care is socialist. Any intrusion by government into any private enterprise is socialist. But here’s the most ludicrous of the evidence he presents us;
Issues of war and peace further weaken the commander in chief’s socialist credentials. Obama announced that all U.S. combat brigades will be removed from Iraq by August 2010, but he still intends to leave as many as 50,000 troops in Iraq and wishes to expand the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. A socialist foreign policy would call for the immediate removal of all troops. It would seek to follow the proposal made recently by an Afghan parliamentarian, which called for the United States to send 30,000 scholars or engineers instead of more fighting forces.
So a “true socialist” would send scholars and engineers to battle a threat? Like those engineers and scholars Chavez sent to the frontier with Colombia last year? Those engineers and scholars that Cuba sent to Angola, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras a few decades ago? The engineers and scholars that Vietnam sent into Laos and Cambodia in the late 70s? Please.
I find it somewhat dismaying that the Post is now publishing columns weekly that tell us we’re paranoid bubbleheads if we think Obama is a socialist. More dismaying is the number of WaPo commenters who agree and thank Wharton for trying to educate the paranoid bubbleheads.
Category: Antiwar crowd, Media, Usual Suspects
There’s no doubt that Obama is a socialist, none whatsoever. Here’s a link to a great article by James Lewis in American Thinker that doesn’t pull any punches on the issue:
Of course he’s a socialist
Campaign misinformation and propoganda: “We need a socialist for President to right the wrongs of Wall Street greed; to bring an end to an unjust war we started in the interest of oil; to initiate nationalized medicine and bring an end to the greed and inhumanity of insurance companies.”
In power misinformation and propoganda: “We’re not creating unprecedented debt and economic ruin to our free enterprise economony, that would be socialist; we’re not looking to bring home our troops by ending the war, we’re going to expand operations in Afghanistan and then see what happens before we decide what to do next, to do otherwise would be socialist; we’re not naitionalizing medicine we’re just offering governmental advice, counsel and direction in an innocuous plan.”
Read my lips. No more socialism…trust us….we know what we’re doing and the unbiased mainstream media has already lambasted us for abandoning our socialist platform….trust them…they know what they’re doing. We have your best interests at heart, America, because we know better and we know what we’re doing.
Time for a Tea Party.