0 votes

A Socialist Speaks: Obama is Not One of Us!

I hope this article -- by a true socialist -- helps illuminate the idea that Obama is not a socialist, as he is mis-labeled by the controlled opposition MSM. Note that all of Obama's policies discussed below - from banking to healthcare to the war state - channel taxpayer dollars directly into the hands of private corporations. Get it straight, folks. That is not socialism. A better word for that is fascism

Snip from the Washington Post

The funny thing is, of course, that socialists know that Barack Obama is not one of us. Not only is he not a socialist, he may in fact not even be a liberal...

The first clear indication that Obama is not, in fact, a socialist, is the way his administration is avoiding structural changes to the financial system. Nationalization is simply not in the playbook of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and his team... Socialists support nationalization and see it as a means of creating a banking system that acts like a highly regulated public utility. The banks would then cease to be sinkholes for public funds or financial versions of casinos and would become essential to reenergizing productive sectors of the economy.

The same holds true for health care. 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. By mandating that every person be insured, ObamaCare would give private health insurance companies license to systematically underinsure policyholders while cashing in on the moral currency of universal coverage. If Obama is a socialist, then on health care, he's doing a fairly good job of concealing it.

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.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

While I get the point, I still think it laughable that

socialists think the same government that couldn't turn a profit peddling booze and whores in Nevada could possibly run the banking system. I mean, look what a bang up job they've done with the home mortgage industry!! And Amtrak!!

Seriously. Get a grip.

reedr3v's picture

Billy Wharton, like most fuzzy thinkers,

calls a political-economic view valid or "true" only if the results match his own abstract concept of the ideal.

If socialized medicine results in poor medical care and high costs, it's not "true" socialism as only exists in his fuzzy little head.

If he's against war, somehow that's not a product of "true" socialism. But in fact war is the product of a strong centralized state or tribal authority, a collectivized consciousness. It's not the result of individualism and freedom.

It is hard to peg...

.....someone who won't come clean about anything. I keep up with the news a bit and what I see from Obama seems more communist than anything. That being said, I don't think this is textbook Marxism. I don't fully understand it.

I read an editorial today that was very interesting. It is one man's opinion so it should be viewed as that.


Maybe more rightly called fascism. But I find humor...

...in that even the socialists don't wanna claim Obama. Lol.

After reading and learning about what Obama stands

for, in my view he is a communist.

The interview I heard and the essay I read the other day only confirmed my thoughts.

Rothbard at 26 called it "military socialism."

In 1952, Murray Rothbard, took a skeptical look at William F. Buckley, founder of the periodical, the National Review, a member of skull and bones and formerly of the CIA. Apparently, Buckley, as a "young republican," wrote a paper in doublespeak. Extolling individual liberties, he nonetheless called for a "totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores," as America's response to socialism.

☺○We need to build political strength and political will•☺

We need to build political strength and political will.

When will the hippies realize their idea's of socialism....

makes them quite "usefull idiots" as Lenin used to say.
That their idea's of socialism are just a tool to transform this nation into a communist nation.

Communism's goal is not to share the wealth, but to share the misery with many & put the wealth in the hands of a few.

Communism is seen as the tool of choice for the global elite to aggregate wealth and control the masses. How long has it been in effect in China, the most populous country in the world, how much wealth do their citizens have ?


"Take hold of the future or the future will take hold of you." -- Patrick Dixon

Great Article

I keep correcting people when they call Obama socialist. Ideally, socialism is a transfer of the wealth from the top down. This system tries to equal everything out so the class system is virtually gone.

Fascism, as described by Mussolini, is collusion of Government and Corporations. This is exactly what we had with Bush and the only difference with Obama is some of the players have changed. Fascism is basically corporatism. This is the system we are under now. The wealth in this system never trickles down. It is constantly sucked from the middle and poor classes to the special interest groups.

These are very different forms of Government. I have visited some Kibbutz in Isreal and they are working communes. This system has worked for them for quite some time. The main reason is that they are small enough to keep any potentially ruling class at bay.

Fascist, Socialist or both he is still a collectivist!

So he's a fascist with socialist tendencies or visa versa. No matter how you slice it he's an enemy of individual rights and personal freedom. Semantic BS.



That is still a socialist...

It is just a different brand. One socialist thinks tax dollars should go to the poor as a form of the 'greater good' and another thinks the greater good is taking peoples money and giving it to banks. What is the difference? The PRINCIPLE is still the same. Can someone explain this to me?

"Greater than the force of mighty armies is the power of an idea whose time has come"
- Victor Hugo

"Greater than the force of mighty armies is the power of an idea whose time has come"
- Victor Hugo

The fact that he uses fear,

The fact that he uses fear, lies and propaganda to push forward his agenda should be disturbing enough. Case in point trying to turn the American people against AIG for their "bonus" payout. President Obama was a freaking lawyer for the love of God, and studied / specialized in Constitutional Law to boot. KNOWING that AIG would be contractually obligated to pay said bonuses SHOULD have been a no-brainer to him and his first response as a rational and educated person in the area of law. However this is not the case.

Now the governments plan is to own and slowly dissolve these institutions versus allowing them to go through a real bankruptcy or liquidation procedure on the "fear that it would be too devastating to the economy if it were to happen so sudden", when in fact, I suspect anyway, the real reason is so they can shave off a bit more profits for the rest of their super rich croonie big banker Berger-buddies.

it's all buzzwords anyway

these words don't necessarily help our arguments because they have become a meaningless prejorative.

they are essentially throw away terms

like a few decades ago, we called people "Commie bastards."

it doesn't mean anything to the unsophisticated liberal.

our points would be best discussed without using these wedge issue terms, anyway.


Socialist/Fascist/Communist/Democracy they are all varying degrees of tyrannical government. When I say varying, I mean a small fraction of a degree difference between them. They all destroy liberty under the guise of acting for 'the people'.

www.coinaxis.com - ~ Learn more about bitcoin/litecoin, and how they relate to the liberty movement.

oh how conforting

headline should read. "Obama not socialist enough says Socialist party member."

It kind of sounds like we

It kind of sounds like we are splitting hairs here. I mean the distinction between socialist, communist, fascist, become very hard to discern and kind of subjective. The thing that all of these things have in common though, is that they have a tendency to result in a tyrannical oppressive government. The thing that this poster does not get is that though communists can normally agree on and end, it will prove nearly impossible for the various sects of socialism and communism to agree to a common means of getting their job done. The money wasting, chaotic order of the system, and the internal disagreements about what the true definition of the "greater good" for all people will disintegrate the hopes people have in this idealistic model of government. This is the to the core of why only individualism works, because there is no universal set of needs for humans. We all have our own wants and needs based on individual tastes, etc. and you cannot graft a set of needs onto an entire population and expect there to be zero discontent, that is insanity.

Never thought he was a socialist ...

He's a COMMUNIST. And, as communists are liars first and foremost, whatever skin he puts on today is meant to bring us all under communist domination. The communist end ALWAYS justifies the means.

It's NO secret. Look at who his mentors were ... look at who his sugar daddies are. Why are we still going round and round trying to figure this thing out folks?

The message that has to be broadcast far and wide is that Obama is a Communist.

It's called the road

to GLOBALISM and it takes whatever path it needs to get there.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

fireant's picture

Misleading Paradigms.

Contemporary tyanny is an amalgamation; the distinctions are no longer valid. G. Edward Griffin explains it much better than I could: http://www.freedom-force.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=l...
“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds”
-Sam Adams

Undo what Wilson did

Whatever it is called

This isn't fascism either. Fascism puts everything in the service of the state, including big business. It is more like a mixture of socialism and mercantilism. Fascism also is based by a philosophy, Actualism, rooted in Idealism. Fascism as a purely politcal system might ignore economics and allow large corporations to do their thing, but it doesn't support big business in and of itself.

I am not a fascist, but calling a personal power hungry-socialist-mercantilist like Obama a fascist is giving fascism a bad name.

See below list.

and tell me which aren't happening. Maybe it's more of a Facist Mercantilism than a socialistic approach.

Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

well how bout that..

14 signs of Facism

1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism.
5. Rampant sexism.
6. A controlled mass media.
7. Obsession with national security.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together.
9. Power of corporations protected.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption.
14. Fraudulent elections.


Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

How about...

How about actually learning something about the real nature of these political systems that people often throw around carelessly to defame someone. Instead it is much easier to simply list a few negative characteristics of government and claim that your are facist.

You could apply that list to almost any government that ever was or will be if you wanted to. No reason to call them signs of "fascism" particularly.

Who said it was carfully?

I was aiming for the head. I know one thing for certain.. it's all double speak for one purpose and that's to deprive us of liberty.

I get the systems I understand the underlying philosophies, I read enough history to understand which ones work and which don't.

It really stems down to two things. Individiualism vs Collectivism.

Now which is fear and which is love? Individiualism or Collectivism.


Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/

Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/

Monsantobama is a fascist?

I think I see what you mean.

The BO is a con-artist - for

The BO is a con-artist - for sale to the highest bidder with the lowest morals.

The highest bidders

over the last 30 years have been neo-conservatives (fascists).

well he doesn't support...

the Republic. So in my book he's the wrong man to be behind the desk.

Assert Your Authority

Assert Your Authority

The best I can give him

He's a fascist with socialist tendencies. Maybe a fascialist.

"It's just one big club... and WE ain't in it!"

"Tyrants fear nothing more than insubordination"

"It's just one big club... and WE ain't in it!"

That is a good description it also describes Bush

Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, etc. etc. on back and on back. Isn't amazing we "fight" fascism over seas and practice it at home.

Thank you Dr. Paul for making me act on what I already knew was right.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*


we spend billions fighting it overseas and then allow it to walk right in the front door and take the oath of office without so much as a legal birth certificate.
Only in America.

"It's just one big club... and WE ain't in it!"

"Tyrants fear nothing more than insubordination"

"It's just one big club... and WE ain't in it!"