?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry


Are you ready for socialism?

  • Oct. 27th, 2008 at 11:07 AM
independent_uk

It is the about the last, the most overblown but perhaps the most potent argument John McCain has left. Elect me, he tells voters, or watch the Democrats gain a hammerlock on Congress and plunge the country into socialism.

If Obama wins, not only would the Democratic Party control the White House, but also both houses of Congress, and by expanded margins. Most important, in the Senate they might reach the magic number of 60 seats required to override a filibuster and thus deprive Republicans of their one remaining weapon, their ability to talk to death legislation they oppose.  Read more and read how John McCain is still predicting victory.

Question: Is this effective scaremongering? Do you want an Obama presidency but a balanced legislature? Or is this the sound of McCain scraping a barrel?

Comments

( Comment )
Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>
(no subject) - miriammoules - Oct. 27th, 2008 11:37 am (UTC)
farla wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 12:21 pm (UTC)
Are you ready for socialism?

Hell yes!
jeffxandra wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 12:43 pm (UTC)
It's amazing to me that the progressive income tax system we've had in place for decades and John McCain has previously supported, has all of a sudden become "socialism"

Bottom of the barrel, absolutely.
cieldumort wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 05:10 pm (UTC)
Been in place for like... 95 years now, right?
(no subject) - ariel817 - Nov. 3rd, 2008 03:42 am (UTC) Expand
dead_sexydexy wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 12:56 pm (UTC)
bottom of the barrel? Probably yes.

Our country, as with democracies throughout history, is destined to move in the direction of socialism. Why would we want to take care of ourselves when the magical mystical government can do it? /cyinisism. Will an Obama presidency along with a democratic house and senate make a huge difference? I doubt it. The republicans had the same benefit in the not so distance past and managed to do little. Our government is mired in beaurocracy and while I will certainly vote, I see little hope in any great change for better or worse either way.
adamwolf wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 01:14 pm (UTC)
What is wrong with socialism, anyway? The best governments manage to combine socialst care for those who have trouble doing it on their own and the desire for a fair distrubtion of a nation's income and resources; with the liberal/conservative care for 'freedom' and all the civil rights that come with it, and a desire to encourage taking risks and making it yourself.
randy_68 wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 02:58 pm (UTC)
Then you need to read about socialism, its effects on a nation, and its outcomes.

Socialism reduces choice, restricts specialization, and erodes personal freedoms. It has been tried over and over again in many countries and always fails. The economy stalls and crashes, non-essential (as the govt sees it) products become scarce to non-existent, jobs decline, and healthcare becomes so burdensome on the economy it becomes pick and choose based on what money is in the system.

Capitalism has created this country. Removing it will cease for it to exist as you currently know it.
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Oct. 27th, 2008 03:22 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:28 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:47 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 27th, 2008 05:09 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Oct. 27th, 2008 05:34 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - ariel817 - Nov. 3rd, 2008 03:47 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Nov. 3rd, 2008 05:26 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - ariel817 - Nov. 3rd, 2008 05:37 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - adamwolf - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:15 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:34 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - onewaystair - Oct. 27th, 2008 11:24 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 28th, 2008 06:27 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - adamwolf - Oct. 29th, 2008 11:56 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 29th, 2008 05:20 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:21 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - adamwolf - Oct. 27th, 2008 05:04 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 27th, 2008 05:13 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - adamwolf - Oct. 27th, 2008 06:00 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 28th, 2008 05:32 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - gxxx - Oct. 28th, 2008 05:38 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 28th, 2008 06:22 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - adamwolf - Oct. 29th, 2008 11:57 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 29th, 2008 05:23 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - pennyann - Oct. 27th, 2008 06:34 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 27th, 2008 07:25 pm (UTC) Expand
Yeah... - rebecca_keys_16 - Oct. 27th, 2008 07:37 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 28th, 2008 05:33 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 28th, 2008 05:07 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - pewter_wings - Oct. 30th, 2008 06:17 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 30th, 2008 11:22 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - pewter_wings - Oct. 31st, 2008 12:27 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 31st, 2008 04:59 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - gxxx - Oct. 27th, 2008 08:26 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - marta - Oct. 27th, 2008 08:37 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - gxxx - Oct. 27th, 2008 08:41 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - holy_outlaw - Oct. 28th, 2008 05:34 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - erynn999 - Oct. 27th, 2008 01:19 pm (UTC) Expand
randy_68 wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 02:59 pm (UTC)
Then you need to read about socialism, its effects on a nation, and its outcomes.

Socialism reduces choice, restricts specialization, and erodes personal freedoms. It has been tried over and over again in many countries and always fails. The economy stalls and crashes, non-essential (as the govt sees it) products become scarce to non-existent, jobs decline, and healthcare becomes so burdensome on the economy it becomes pick and choose based on what money is in the system.

Capitalism has created this country. Removing it will cease for it to exist as you currently know it.
(no subject) - pennyann - Oct. 27th, 2008 06:38 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - erynn999 - Nov. 2nd, 2008 04:18 am (UTC)
(no subject) - thereallola - Nov. 1st, 2008 09:44 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - erynn999 - Nov. 2nd, 2008 04:13 am (UTC)
(no subject) - raisingrl1280 - Nov. 2nd, 2008 11:59 pm (UTC) Expand
makyo wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 01:27 pm (UTC)
Hmmm. I think the Democratic Party and the US itself both have a fair way to go before they could reasonably be described as 'socialist', but to hear a lot of people on the right wing of US politics describe it, a vote for Obama is tantamount to joining the Communist Party. I notice also that it is the incumbent, Republican, administration which has just nationalised several failing banks.
kevynjacobs wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 01:29 pm (UTC)
Give me Socialism!
randy_68 wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 02:59 pm (UTC)
Goto Valenzuela, Russia, or China then.
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Oct. 27th, 2008 03:25 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:33 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:52 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 27th, 2008 07:16 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Oct. 27th, 2008 11:16 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - rebecca_keys_16 - Oct. 27th, 2008 07:42 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - pewter_wings - Oct. 30th, 2008 06:19 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 30th, 2008 10:46 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - pewter_wings - Oct. 31st, 2008 12:35 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - adamwolf - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:16 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - credendovides - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:26 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - adamwolf - Oct. 27th, 2008 05:05 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - rebecca_keys_16 - Oct. 27th, 2008 07:39 pm (UTC) Expand
gymx wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 02:51 pm (UTC)
socialism oh noes!!!1
tyskkvinna wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 02:51 pm (UTC)
I have to laugh when I hear cries of socialism. I've lived under socialist governments before. The American government has absolutely had facets of socialism for a long time. But "full-on" socialism? Not from Obama.

Perhaps I've misread a lot of things, but I was under the impression that his health care plan would allow people who presently have health care to continue doing so. And that if you happen to not be able to afford it now, it would be subsidized in whole or in part. And if you think the idea of health insurance is stupid, you can continue to not have it. I don't really see how this is socialist. If everybody was suddenly forced to have the exact same health care plan, then sure.
randy_68 wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 03:02 pm (UTC)
under the impression that his health care plan would allow people who presently have health care to continue doing so

Yes, but really, if your neighbor is getting better healthcare than you from the govt, why would you continue to go with your employers? This will cause a bandwagon effect and cripple the system in a very short time.

As I keep telling people, if you think socialism is the tops, read up onit, and the countries that implement it. Then look at how they're doing and why.
(no subject) - credendovides - Oct. 27th, 2008 03:20 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 27th, 2008 04:38 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - tyskkvinna - Oct. 27th, 2008 05:07 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - adamwolf - Oct. 27th, 2008 05:10 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - katydidagain - Oct. 27th, 2008 06:10 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - pennyann - Oct. 27th, 2008 06:43 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - randy_68 - Oct. 27th, 2008 07:02 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - rebecca_keys_16 - Oct. 27th, 2008 07:50 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - summers_place - Oct. 27th, 2008 09:25 pm (UTC) Expand
credendovides wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 02:57 pm (UTC)
The way the McCain campaign paints it, you're either socialist or not. Given that McCain has currently and in the past supported government actions that could be considered socialist, at what point does it actually become socialism?

And that is the crux of the matter, and why it is just scraping the bottom of the barrel. Some people will, of course, buy it. But the truth is, it isn't black or white. It's more of a spectrum. And the United States isn't at one end of the scale, it is a little off from that. Even the most liberal Democrats are usually still right of center on the scale.

So it is a huge stretch to say that anything will "plunge the country into socialism" anymore than the Republicans already have.
seldearslj wrote:
Oct. 28th, 2008 01:11 am (UTC)
Yes, but the way the McCain campaign paints it, if you don't vote Republican, you're not a "real" American.

What kind of a federal party divides its population into the "real" and the "fake"?

What kind of an idiot believes that the latte literati are any more or less important than the farmer in his field when it comes to making up a country?

Somewhere in hell, McCarthy is having the last laugh, I'm sure.
iber wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 03:01 pm (UTC)
Why is it that Socialism is a dirty word? I mean seriously, look at so many of our allied countries. They have more socialism within their governmental systems yet are still democratic... Although I'm probably ignoring the part where Americans tend to only think about themselves and not the rest of the world. Anyway, Socialism gets such a bad reputation for being connected to (Stalinist) Communism...

Pulling the socialist card out would have been effective during the height of the Red Scare upwards to the 80's, but I don't think it will be that effective in scaring voters.

A balanced legislature will never occur. Both parties are against that. They want total control. Based on the trends that one party tends to take and keep control over an extended period of time, it's time for the Democrat party to do that.
lavenderfrost wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 03:01 pm (UTC)
Only loosely related, but it's so amusing to me how the same Republicans who wanted to do away with filibustering back during the controversy over Dubya's Supreme Court nominees are so worried about not being able to filibuster in a "Socialist" congress now.

What goes around comes around, suckers.
beavis_the_wise wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 03:19 pm (UTC)
I'm ready. I'm excited by the possibility that a democrat could be president while they control both houses. An acceleration in reform would occur, and this is the best possible scenario for our country.

We need to redefine our "American ideals" so that they are compatible with certain aspects of socialism. It won't be easy because it's such a dirty word to so many people, but once the fear of socialism is gone, I think our policies could actually start making a bit of sense.
credendovides wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 03:30 pm (UTC)
I don't really see it as much of a re-definition. After all, isn't the government helping people with health care and such just furthering it's responsibility towards "certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness"?

Furthermore, "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it".

So it is the right of the people to elect a government that will cease this erosion of civil liberties that the Bush government has put on us under the false pretense of national security.
(no subject) - beavis_the_wise - Oct. 27th, 2008 03:41 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - rebecca_keys_16 - Oct. 27th, 2008 07:59 pm (UTC) Expand
woopflying wrote:
Oct. 27th, 2008 03:21 pm (UTC)

Socialism with private enterprise works, look at europe.

It was working until the private enterprise wheel fell off.
Page 1 of 3
<<[1] [2] [3] >>
( Comment )