Blogs and Stories
Socialist Shocker!
Charles Dharapak / AP Photo
A stunning new poll shows that just 53 percent of Americans favor capitalism over socialism. The Daily Beast’s Benjamin Sarlin writes that it’s not Obama’s fault. It’s Rush Limbaugh’s.
Maybe Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are right—socialism is a real and dire threat to America. The latest Rasmussen poll shows a stunningly low 53 percent of Americans favor capitalism over the dreaded "s" word, with a full 20 percent preferring socialism and an additonal 27 percent unsure.
Even in the current economic gloom, it’s an eye-opening result. But it’s worth asking whether the supposed socialist resurgence is really the work of President Barack Obama, who has been branded a socialist since the 2008 campaign, or the same right-wing talkers who have been shouting it over the airwaves.
It’s not at all surprising that when Rush Limbaugh (approval rating: 19 percent) lectures Americans about how Barack Obama is a socialist, well, people just might start deciding that they prefer socialism by default.
President Obama and the Democrats have bent themselves into policy pretzels to avoid any policy that gives off even a whiff of nationalizing banks or other companies. In one recent interview, Obama was so shocked to even receive a question about his free-market bona fides that he assumed the interviewer was joking. Only later did he call back to remind the reporter that he had inherited a bailout supported by both presidential candidates, as well as nationalized insurance companies, mortgage firms, and banks, and a huge increase in spending, all courtesy of his free-market predecessor in the White House.
Nor does socialism have anyone of note speaking on its behalf. The actual Socialist Party in America is small and inconsequential, and the only professed socialist in Congress, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, keeps a low profile on the national stage.
No, it’s increasingly clear that socialism’s newfound popularity comes from the Mitch McConnells, John Boehners, Rush Limbaughs, Sean Hannitys, and Glenn Becks of the world, whose repeated invocations of the term have pushed a previously DOA political movement to new heights of popularity.
The Rasmussen poll on socialism needs to be viewed in the context of the overall political environment. The Republican Party is both smaller and less liked than at any time in modern history. In the latest CBS/NYT poll, the GOP had a putrid 31 percent approval rating, its lowest ever recorded. President Obama was more than twice as popular in the same poll, with a robust 66 percent backing his performance. The GOP is also tinier than ever: Only 24 percent of respondents from one recent Pew poll identified as Republican, an astoundingly low number for a two-party country.
So it's not at all surprising that when Rush Limbaugh (approval rating: 19 percent), Sen. Mitch McConnell (approval rating: 23 percent), and Rep. John Boehner (approval rating: 18 percent) lecture Americans about how Barack Obama is a socialist, well, people just might start deciding that they prefer socialism by default. When politicians like Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL) channel their inner Joe McCarthy and claim that some 17 members of the House are socialists, one would bet the collectivized farm that the congressional 17 are way more popular than the guy waving the list of them.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
What's Joe's Problem?
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
Sarah Palin, Creationist?
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
10 Palin Hits the Leakers Missed
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
Samuel P. Jacobs is a staff reporter at The Daily Beast. He has also written for The Boston Globe, The New York Observer, and The New Republic Online.
The Man Who Beat Glenn Beck
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
So what you're saying is that so many people hate and know that Rush et al are full of crap that the more they talk about the evils of socialism the more people who otherwise didn't care about it say, "if Rush hates it, it must be good." That's a beautiful irony if true.
I suspect you haven't listened to Rush enough to have a clue about what he thinks.
"Barack Obama is a committed socialist, trained by Marxists like Saul Alinsky who bows at the feet of Jeremiah Wright."
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_091708/content/01125110.gue st.html
Did I miss something?
Rush thinks????
No yamuvva, you didn't miss anything...rush nailed it...
...a lot more than you rvgrandpa...
The only thing that scares me more than real socialism - which we're not even close to talking about in this country - is the Republicans gaining in popularity again.
...and jwmulus, the only thing that scares me is that there are people out there like you...
The Repubs are not going to regain, their crediability is gone and they have nothing to talk about. The youth of this nation is understanding a little more than they really prefer and they have lost complete control.
"That's a beautiful irony if true."
Sometimes the good guys win. Enjoy it while it lasts.
We have serious economic problems. I don't care what it is called--socialism, hocus-pocus, the sprinkling of fairy dust-- if it works, I want it and I want it now.
We are desperate, and therefore, open to new ideas.
Our prom date, Capitalism, bailed at the last moment and now we are scrambling to find a respectable last minute replacement. Socialism is looking less repulsive than we previously thought. Who knows? Perhaps Socialism is our diamond in the rough.
The laws of economics don't change. Government intervention in the economy is the source of these problems. Republicans love to do bail outs too. Risk is borne by the taxpayer, see Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Going deeper into debt to get out of debt doesn't work for me and you or anyone else. The big banks are insolvent but they have friends in the government as always. Expect the US to default on the debt and the dollar to be worth a nickel by the time we boot the Fool in Chief out in 2012.
"Government intervention in the economy is the source of these problems."
Can you please explain what you mean by this statement? Is there any evidence that the financial industry was under-regulated? Have you ever heard of the Glass-Steagall Act? Do you know what effect the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act had on speculation and investment? What, exactly, do you think brought us out of the Great Depression? If it wasn't the massive government spending of FDR's New Deal or the massive government spending of WWII, what was it?
Bailouts suck. So does chemotherapy.
I'll try:
The Fed created artificially low interest rates, which combined with tax subsidized home loans, caused a housing bubble. Bailouts have hindered the recovery process by making banks hold off on selling assets for 10 cents on the dollar when Uncle Sam and Taxpayers will pay 30 cents on the dollar. Capitalism is every much to do with punishment as it does reward. The government is rewarding failure, and ensuring that these people are around to make the next bubble turn into a disaster.
The bi-partisan deregulation in the late 90s has exacerbated the problem, but it was not the cause of the problem. CDS need to be regulated, but they are not evil things all by themselves. No one complains about insurance when there's a hurricane, only the fraud and insolvency of institutions that don't make good on their promises.
The Great Depression affected much of the world. Coincidentally, much of the world also had to contend with the destruction of WWII. Our industry was one of a handful that remained undamaged. The U.S. was the only major industrial superpower remaining after WWII. That's how we got out of it.
Debt is useful to bootstrap your company, afford a house, or pay tuition. You know there is a surplus of income down the line that will eventually pay for it. How does the country know that? Our personal finance reality prevents us from taking on more debt than we can repay in our lifetimes. Our elected officials can just pass it to the next generation. But at some point, servicing the debt will take up too much of our resources. Then it's total economic collapse.
"Expect the US to default on the debt and the dollar to be worth a nickel by the time we boot the Fool in Chief out in 2012."
Response: Lets not forget every major industrial nation is having a similiar economic crisis. The dollar cannot fall relative to other currencies while they are doing bailouts as well. This isn't just a US problem. It is global.
@ aBigDeal's:
I appreciate your response, but I find it unconvincing. I am by no means an expert, nor even particularly well versed in the topic, but this is how I see it:
I agree that it appears the government is rewarding failure, but I believe what it is actually attempting to do is simply mitigate the dire consequences of a "total economic collapse" that has little to do with the federal deficit or debt. You seem to believe that the current administration is giving away free money and will neither expect nor require any changes on the business models of the recipients. If that turns out to be true, I will be the first to protest against Obama, but there is already evidence to the contrary. Restructuring of failing auto makers has already gotten underway, and banks are trying to return TARP funds because they are uncomfortable with federal conditions, including not being allowed to pay ungodly sums of bonus money to keep on the executives who caused or ignored the problem to begin with.
Federal funds rates, loan interest rates and "tax-payer subsidized loans" are all honest points of any debate about economic policy, but I seriously doubt that keeping the rate a few percentage points higher would have prevented the collapse. Again, I don't know what should be considered a "realistic" interest rate, but whatever it is would not change the impetus for banks and other financial institutions to do anything they can to increase profits. That is an essential problem with capitalism. I am not a socialist Capitalism is a remarkable engine for growth and development, but to say that unregulated self interest has no downside is absurd, and even Alan Greenspan admits that now.
You seem to be implying that "tax subsidized home loans," among other things, are somehow a form of government mandated usury, allowing high-risk borrowers to bamboozle honest lenders eager to help their community. In reality, the boom of CDS throughout the 2000s virtually eliminated any free market disincentive to engage in predatory lending. Why would a bank care if a borrower was likely to repay a loan if the bank could just sell off that risk? Of course CDS aren't any more evil than the twenty dollar bill in my wallet, but they were used as a tool to socialize risk in such a way that banks felt they could ignore it on their balance sheets.
I suppose you are at least partially right about WWII's impact on the Great Depression, but it still presupposes that the American economy had recovered enough by the end of the war to take its place as a global economic power.
As far as the federal budget is concerned, Obama certainly needed (and still needs) to do something about Bush's massive debt. How would that be addressed by allowing banks and insurers to fail, taking down a large portion of the economy with them? Where would the federal government's income come from then?
Of course, all of this distracts from the original point the article was trying to make, which is the Rush Limbaugh is, indeed, a big fat idiot. However, he is opening the way for an honest national debate that admits there is a spectrum between capitalism and socialism, and the US has never been purely capitalistic, since such a beast is impossible in practice. Now the only question that remains is how far along the spectrum we want our country to be.
@yamuvva
There was a cost to remove the risk of those liar loans. And the cost wasn't high enough apparently. The firms that assumed the risk should have realized that the bubble was going to burst and increased their premiums. That would have prevented the lenders from making too many risky loans. But some were aware that they were "too big to fail". They knew they could make off like bandits and the government would be there to pick up the pieces. Plus there was no knowledge of the insurer's exposure to what the swaps were worth. A clearinghouse would have alleviated that.
And when the money supply has an upward force on home prices, there is more incentive to make liar loans. Add that to the fact everyone was in real estate after the dot com collapse. If your borrower defaulted, you were left with 100% of a much more valuable asset. Inventory costs don't matter when your asset is magically twice as valuable.
So, if we have stable prices, we have a stable economy. Every major recession/depression teaches us that.
The "too big to fail" fallacy has been perpetuated by the Paulsons and Geitners of the world, who have a vested interest (ties to Goldman Sachs) to prop up Wall Street risk takers. There is some systemic risk involved, but no one has been able to measure it. Unless 50% or more the industry was heavily invested in these toxic assets, I think it would have survived a complete shakedown. Assets would have been sold off for their true value and the imprudent players would have been forced out of the market, while the prudent players would have been rewarded. Capitalism needs failure to work.
"Rush Limbaugh is, indeed, a big fat idiot"
How is that helpful in determining the optimal level of government intervention?
All I know is that governments operate like monopolies, with little or no competition. When have monopolies ever been the ideal for consumers?
...at least chemotherapy works yamuvva...
Yamuvva,
I was just thinking about you as i was reading about the Napoleonic Wars and how they disposed of Napoleon...there's this great island called St. Helen's you need to check out ...(along with your socialistic and Keynesian idiot friends)...
I suggest you move to any country in the world, stay there for about 6 months, and I bet my life you'll be crying to come back to America.
What rubbish!
Socialism is our diamond in the rough?
Give me a break...
This article makes some valid points. It is my belief that Americans generally are smart enough to understand that having a president more attuned to social needs and social justice does not make him a socialist. President Obama believes, I believe, still in the market economy, so-called free trade, and capitalist principles; but with more attention paid to social justice.
News Flash: We have an elaborate social safety net in place. Our justice system could be better but it works. The free market works when the government doesn't bail out the losers and bill the competent for it. Obama will make us all equally poor. Your children will not thank you for killing off the American Dream.
If there was no problem with the workings of the free market before the bailouts, why did we need bailouts?
What American Dream? The dream that ensures the wealthiest receive the best healthcare and education; and therefore so do their children?
That's not my dream - it's my nightmare!
ya I agree we shouldn't have bailed out the rich losers who are supposed to be sooooo knowledgeable about the banking industry. The American Dream was and is fabricated by our capitalistic society as a way to spend more and get into debt more. it is a superficial way to live and I never believed in it.
REALITY CHECK!
What "elaborate social safety net" are you talking about, chief?
TAIWAN has better health insurance than we do!
Our "safety net" is probably quite excellent - compared to Botswana, Chad or Papua New Guinea!!!
But compared to any other industrial country, we come in dead last!
We didn't need bailouts yamuvva...socialist boy ordered them ...
The banks were socialized when Bush's Treas. Sec. Paulsen brought in all the bank CEO's and said "You will be taking this TARP money"
How about medicare? Is that socialism? How about Social Security? Is that Socialism. Conservatives only hear what they want to hear. It makes them feel better to believe that Obama is the first and only president to Socialize U.S. Institutions. Which is why they have no credibility wether or not they are named "Rush"
Just more proof of the dumbing down of US citizens and the propaganda onslaught underway. I wonder if those that favour socialism have really seen its true effects in countries in Africa and South America ?
The current bad situations in Africa and South America are generally due to predatory capitalist activities by large multinational corporations and their lackey government supporters (read paid off) over the last 40 years. Any socialism that resulted is just a response to these devastating actions by a desperate populace. A poor use of capitalism, like Rush, has caused this backlash, again thanks to those corporations and their government "employees".
*Cough* Sweden *cough* Norway, Denmark, Germany *cough cough*
And those in favour of privatizing everything, have they ever looked at what happened in New Zealand?
http://www.commondreams.org/views/081500-106.htm
A socialist world can not work. Since the rise of socialism/communism in the early 20th century, it has always been off-set by a strong capitalist America, which drove innovation and was always there to produce the needs to the world. The loss or even dilution of our capitalism will lead to a decline in ambition, more government control of life and even more class warfare which will lead not to a socialist uptopia, but a fascist nightmare. Those suffering from BDS, like jwmdus who is more afraid of Republicans than socialism need to understand that George Bush is not capitalism. To trash a system that has created the greatest country in the history of the world because you didn't like one leader shows a stunning lack of intellecutal capacity. If we don't want to lead the world anymore, China will be happy to. Then, loudmouths with BDS will find out how good they had it back when they could actually articulate their displeasure with government.
if you don't know the difference between Socialism and Communism, as you clearly demonstrate in your first sentence, you've already discredited anything else you might contribute!
Not true. Communism can't work, socialism is different. In communism, nobody owns and land or objects, everyone is paid the same, and everyone must work toward whatever goals the leaders set up.
Socialism is taking care or your constituents through taxes. Preferably taken from the wealthy. These services would be police, roads, schools, firefighters, and soon healthcare. But you are right about that "strong capitalist influence" that we were wielding around the globe. It was called:buy our stuff or we invade.
The fact is that Socialism often leads to Communism. Just ask anyone who immigrated from the Former Soviet Union.
Yeah, that's what I thought (speaking as an Australian resident in the UK) - the Americans who say they like "socialism" think it means "Democrat-brand centre-right."
On the NOM, here's the little-known part 3 of their audition tapes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXrAAdGmxYM
We, like all countries considered to operate under a capitalist economy, operate as a government managed capitalist economy. Some governments manage better than others. Ours has not managed well in a long time and appears to be getting worse. As for socialism, I do not see the U.S. going to the degree of socialism that calls for outright ownership of the means of production by the people. No, our form of socialism is a government/business partnership that looks more like fascism. Its not a conservative/liberal problem we have here, it is a statism problem.
Socialism is the most democratic of economic systems......no surprise most people would support it when they learn when it really is.
In theory. Never in practice. Ask those who have lived under it.
True - but it's principles can be found hard at work within the parts of our government that we all tend to have pride in: our police officers, firefighters, librarians, etc are all working for our "socialist" government programs.
And just because people have failed to find a way to apply socialism in practice (more so than the way we utilize it) doesn't mean that it can't and shouldn't be done.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
greennamaste: the military, police, and courts are indeed funded by the government, but funding of these is not really a socialist idea. even the most strict night watchman libertarian agrees that public defence and a public body to enforce and apply laws are required for any society. where they disagree is where the role of government is no longer required. medical care is a classic example where they disagree.
it bothers me that those who believe in excessively large government always claim that libertarians are in favor of complete privatization. i consider myself a libertarian, but i see the obvious logic in having public roads, firefighters, and yes, as a canadian, even public medical care.
Dave1959, from you comments i can see u have no idea what socialism is. You're only holding on to cold war era bias against left wing economic theories. Those countries u mentioned are as they are due to a multitude of issues and problems, not because they are socialist.
Ix-Isaac,
No, we are not holding onto cold war biases...we have experienced and seen its effects on countries...so where are you coming from boy?
This user is no longer registered.
Thank you...thank you...thank you! You said what I wanted to say.
I feel sooooo embarrased for our country. We are no longer the greatest country in the world. And none of your are seeing this!!
Let me see... I worked for a company at a mid level for 10 years. Should I have been hired as CEO of that company? NO WAY! What were all you that voted for him thinking!!! He is not qualified and the insanity that has been happening since he came into office is the example of this.
I agree...
Oh, good lord, JetJagger, would you wake the f$#* up? It's so obvious that you get all your opinions from listening to Hannity and Rush and O'Reilly and don't even take the time to do research on your own.
For example, your so-called "quote" - "We're an arrogant country of non-Christians." Have you even gotten off your lazy ass to look up what Obama actually said? No - because sheeple like you believe whatever your are told by your right-wing demagogue heroes. Look up the quote in which Obama says "At some times we have ACTED with arrogance.." try reading the rest of the quote, in which he upbraids Europeans for anti-Americanism, and tells them that instead of focusing on all the good we've done in the world they tend to blame us for all it's problems. Wow - a balanced statement. From a president - can you believe that? But you're so idiotic you would rather get your panties in a bunch over a quote that you didn't even read.
About the "a country of non-Christians." That's just so off-the-mark of what he said that I won't even go there. Do some history, dude. No - you might actually have to open a book and not have some gouty, fat old angry white man yell it at you - but try it just for once. Read about our founding fathers and Deism. Read about the bible that Jefferson wrote. Read about the disdain Franklin and Thomas Paine had for churches. Read about why all these men thought the single most important aspect of founding this new republic was that there be a clear separation of church and state. Then, if you're still embarassed to be an American...if somehow you sat through 8 years of the international-clown, backwoods moron Bush who left our country hated by the world, in two wars, with the worst economic downturn in 80 years, still recovering from poorly handled natural disasters, in huge debt to foreign nations, and without many of our traditional world allies - and weren't embarassed then - well then, my friend, maybe you should move to Canada.
LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!!!
fascism?
Please if President Obama was a fascist he would be rightwing, his critics would have disappeared already and FOX "news" would have gone off the air.
Like people mentioned, there are degrees of socialism. Pure capitalism is bound of fail and so is pure socialism. US is far from being pure capitalist and holds socialist elements, as is every single economy. The argument is that we need to move left more to deal with the current situation. Even nationalizing the banks for a period of time to build up investor trust is a far cry from being socialism.
No it's not...it's one more step closer to socialism...it's like cooking the frog slowly...keep inching up the temperature and all of a sudden he's cooked....
Don't look now, but China is already on the verge of taking over world leadership. They are in the process of mastering innovation and managed competition and have already eclipsed us in math, science and engineering. The only thing we're still better at is having faith.
Not according to Obama!! "We are not a Christian nation!" We do not have a solid faith anymore.
We were founded on Christianity. And failing to follow our founding fathers is what is put this country into crisis!!
Obama is not a Christian and does not hold these beliefs.
Oh GoAwayObama, how small your world must be.
Many, many, many of us are not Christian. Melting pot...remember?
Perhaps it's not being Christian that's the problem but today's irreverant, irresponsible, and spiritually lacking society?
I don't agree with much of what is done at the highest level of our executive branch either, but I don't blame it on religion.
Personally I think it's that everyone heard 'brave new world' and 'Obama' and voted that way - me? I voted Mickey Mouse for President and Goofy for Vice President.
In fact I wrote in all Looney Toons and Disney characters as I felt there were no good choices and/or that my vote didn't count anyway. It was my personal protest because to me, the choice was made by the media and not we the people, but I still felt it my duty as well as my right to vote.
I hope you become enlightened to the fact that there are very good and very evil people that hail from all religious faiths including atheists.
Again, as I always say, the law should equal us all.
Right now it seems like Murphy's Law is in, but I can always hope that it would be the Golden Rule instead, then we wouldn't need any others.
My uptopian dream is that everyone really would have the opportunity to pursue their own happiness as long as it didn't harm others.
It's possible, but only in a respectful, free society, where each person takes responsibility for his or her actions and is treated exactly equal under the law.
A younger generation thinks socialism is cool because they don't have a clue what democracy is all about. Thanks Keith Olberman et al.
This user is no longer registered.
You go!!!
The great thing about our country is that it has the capacity to CHANGE. When are people going to stop having blind faith in what *they* believe to be "America" and instead realize that the real America lives in the hard working people of this country and their dreams. If more socialism helps more people realize their dreams then I can't think of anything more American than that.
GreenNamaste...great moniker to mislead people with...using the Great Spirit to make us all trust you so that you can lead us down the garden path to our destruction...
Bite me GreenNamaste...
Capitalism will not work in the long term without deep ethics any more than Communism will work with deep ethics. The bigger the capitalists get, the less ethical they get. That is why Teddy R busted the trusts. We need to bust up those corporations too big to fail and limit all corporations, foreign and domestic, to competitive sized and small enough to fail.
Prosperous countries with corrupt governments don't stay prosperous long. If only individual citizens could contribute to campaigns we might see the cesspool begin to drain. Right now we have more crooks and incompetents in the West Wing than ever before. The high water mark of the American Left.
This user is no longer registered.
Wow! It is Rush who is taking this country to Socialism and not Obama. I never thought Rush had so much influence. I believe Sarlin is looking for job in Obama White House.
This user is no longer registered.
So true!!
I've opened two small business in the last two months so as not to allow corporate health to dictate my own. Both are really doing well. I voted for Obama. So you're wrong.
The Rush Limbaugh version of capitalism is nothing more than socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the schnooks.
Exactly!!! Why work...wait to have everything handed to you!!
"GoAwayObama" is right. Conservatives need to take a stand like ACORN (only ACORN gets paid by the government) and take America back before Obama drives the bus into the gutter.
You don't listen to Rush very much, do you?
The reason the other 47% like socialism is that's probably the system the governments ran under in the countries they originated from.
I'm a capitalist pig to the end. I am SICK of paying more taxes than my UK, Canadian, German, etc...counterparts to help others that usually make more than I DO!!
I know that I pay more than my counterparts because I have friends that are citizens of and still live in those countries and when we compared financial notes, they were shocked at how much I pay out and what little MOST Americans receive in return.
Socialism / communism in its pure form seems to be a very beautiful and utopian ideal society in which we'd all share everything - but we all know that the slackers and moochers wouldn't do their fare share and the rest of us would be beholden to pay for ourselves and them as well.
A real life case in point to this is evident by those boo-hooing about not being able to pay for their mortgage and getting a $ hug while the good payers get slapped in the face!
So while I would love to live in a world of peace and light loving my neighbor, I know that some people save, some people work and pay, and some people just mooch off the rest of us...because some are energetic leaders and the rest of us sit on our butts writing in here LOL...(guilty!! :-)
Read it again. 20% prefer socialism.
Ahhh...thanks redcedar....I hope you will forgive my faux pas...math has never been my strong point.
They have their right to their opinion as well, but I hope America remains free in the Democratic / capitalist sense. It is from this freedom that some of the greatest inventions rose, but, alas that was so long ago...we need to rekindle the spirit of 'American ingenuity' that had been our trademark and now only seems a distant legacy as our country, economy, and other parts of our infrastructure are being systematically dismantled.
there's another angle to this...when the republicans trot out "socialism" as a boogie-man, they don't evoke venezuela or china..they fret that we are becoming "more like europe."
trying to scare people by arguing, that if we don't watch out, america will end up like...*ahem*... sweden is bound to fail...
Conservatives point to all these socialist countries. You are not informed.
So socialism is popularized under Obama, and it's Limbaugh's fault? That's rich.
Leave it to Obama to make socialism look cool. At least people will get a good look at a type of socialism, American-style, under Obama. They will then be able to judge firsthand whether they like it up close.
Did you know that Canadians (and perhaps other countries' citizens) get free public education to the AA degree level? Why don't we?
Did you know that if you can't pay your rent in England the government pays it for you? Why isn't this true in America?
Did you know that every other industrialized country in the world enjoys universal healthcare? Why don't we? Even if I had to wait 2 years to get the operation I need it's better than never being able to have it at all and dying early because I can't afford it!!
Food for thought.
Not really...dumb...dumb...dumb...
Wow GoAwayObama!!
You don't believe that our taxes should benefit American citizens?
You find That dumb?!!
WOW! Your ignorance astonishes me!
I want my taxes to mean something to me personally as well as everyone I know.
We work hard, obey all the laws and pay our taxes in full and on time.
So what's dumb about wanting our taxes to work for us?
What? You think I should work and just hand over my cash to you?!
I want to see school programs for children, true help for the needy including programs that ensure they only stay on such a program for 1-2 years while they get training for real work, and for every person in our country to be a contributing member of our society.
Some people are ignorant losers who want to slack off and feel that my statement for making our taxes be used for public benefit (which is supposedly their purpose) because they (i.e. probably people like you GoAwayObama) don't want to work for a living but mooch off the rest of us, but karma has a way of showing up when you least expect it.
I hope you find enlightenment and whenever you find a way for me to pay for a $50,000 operation without having insurance and only making $25,000 per year...you let me know, huh?
Cheers!
Because signoftheTimes, we are paying for England's defense; along with the rest of the countries of Europe..
...if you didn't have to pay for defense, you'd have lots of money to pay for goodies instead of working for them...
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.