McCain and Palin...oh and the rest of their Republican supporters are so out of touch with the concepts of socialism, like virtually all of McCain's campaign tactics, the use of these labels is only designed to frighten uninformed people into once again voting against their own interests. It is likely to fail, thankfully.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
–noun
- A theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
- Procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
- (in Marxist theory) The stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
American Heritage Dictionary
-noun
- Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
- The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary
-noun
A theory or system of social reform which contemplates a complete reconstruction of society, with a more just and equitable distribution of property and labor. In popular usage, the term is often employed to indicate any lawless, revolutionary social scheme. See Communism, Fourierism, Saint-Simonianism, forms of socialism.
[Socialism] was first applied in England to Owen's theory of social reconstruction, and in France to those also of St. Simon and Fourier . . . The word, however, is used with a great variety of meaning, . . . even by economists and learned critics. The general tendency is to regard as socialistic any interference undertaken by society on behalf of the poor, . . . radical social reform which disturbs the present system of private property . . . The tendency of the present socialism is more and more to ally itself with the most advanced democracy. --Encyc. Brit.
McCain and Palin...oh and the rest of their Republican supporters are so out of touch with the concepts of socialism, like virtually all of McCain's campaign tactics, the use of these labels is only designed to frighten uninformed people into once again voting against their own interests. It is likely to fail, thankfully.
McCain and Palin have criticized Obama's proposal to raise taxes on high earners and require that businesses provide health insurance. Palin referred to the plan as "a little bit like socialism."
Over the weekend, McCain said: "At least in Europe, the socialist leaders who so admire my opponent are upfront about their objectives."
William Wallace, a former vice president and chief operating officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, said the country's progressive tax code, which Mr. McCain does not propose abolishing, is "socialist in nature.
Let's not forget that just recently McCain voted FOR allowing the federal government to take ownership stakes in private banks - as did Obama.
According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Mr. Obama's plan would reduce taxes for 80 percent of households, while raising them for 10 percent. Mr. McCain's plan would lower taxes for 60 percent of households, and raise them for 1 percent.
At a rally in St. Louis on Saturday, Obama said, "John McCain is so out of touch with the struggles you are facing that he must be the first politician in history to call a tax cut for working people 'welfare.'"
McCain, Palin and their surrogates scream - without any factual basis whatsoever - that Obama will raise taxes on small business that provide 16 million jobs, that his proposals to hike taxes will kill jobs. But less than 2 percent of all small businesses in the country earn enough to qualify for the top tax brackets, according to the Tax Policy Center. The majority pay either 15 percent or 25 percent, according to the center.
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, programs that have been phenomenal successes by any measure even despite shortcomings and flaws, they can all be considered socialistic in nature. Conservative Republicans have been working tirelessly to weaken, even eliminate these critical social safety nets since FDR first proposed the first programs during the depths of the Great Depression.
Ronald Reagan, the conservative Republican "God-substitute," wailed away about the evils of Medicare well before he became an iconic political power.
Where would we be, as a nation, without these critical programs?
It's like the 2000 election myth of George W. Bush's "compassionate conservatism." I'm still looking for evidence of anything resembling compassionate action in any of Bush's record, let alone that of Republicans since the "Reagan Revolution."
Nope, I'm looking...don't see it at insurance companies...don't see it in any plan to propose Social Security invest in the volatile stock market...don't see it in a Republican administration that almost annually reduces Medicare physician payments...nope, don't see it in tax giveaways to the wealthiest Americans...nope, don't see it in free trade agreements that are far from "fair" trade agreements...I just don't find it anywhere. It was all a myth, all a lie.
Yet, America? You fell for it in 2000 and 2004. And thanks to you all falling for it, millions more people are without health insurance, without jobs, and living in failing communities in every single state - including Arizona and Alaska. The only thing that keeps Alaska afloat is, ironically, oil company taxes - which Sarah Palin was proud to increase as governor! Hmmm.
clearthemist.blogspot.com