Obama denies he's a Socialist?

Chatting in a thread last night, I mentioned that with all the attention placed on Obama and his perceived Socialistic leanings, that it would be a good idea for him to deny the charge.

That he should come right out and say "no, I am not a socialist".
I'm not sure that he has ever denied it. And with so many Americans claiming that he is, it might just push him over the 50 percent hump, and guarantee that the election swings his way.

Other than mocking those that call him a socialist, or a marxist, why doesn't he just say "no, I'm not"?

Maybe he already has, and I missed it. Please link to a video, or a reliable source if you can.

According to McCain...

www.huffingtonpost.com...
In an interview with Larry King that aired last night, John McCain admitted that he doesn't think Barack Obama is a socialist, which runs counter to most of his campaign rhetoric for the past week. The admission ...

I'm not agreeing one way or the other, just sayin'...

[edit on 30-10-2008 by 12m8keall2c]

Originally posted by spacedoubt
he should come right out and say "no, I am not a socialist".

No one would believe it. Well .. only those that closed their eyes and put their fingers in their ears while singing lalalalalalala.

All his policies and practices say differently.

Oh .. and there's this gem -

“To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists.”
—Barack Obama in his memoir, Dreams From My Father

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
According to McCain...

I don't believe him either.

I can see for myself what Obama is and judge by what he does.

'By the fruits you shall know the tree'.
Obama's fruits are full of worms and the tree is marxism.

It's funny because the guy that's running for the Socialist Party has said that Obama is far from a Socialist.

But he's probably been paid off by Obama, I'm sure.

It's funny because a couple of months ago you were all crawling up Obama's ass about him having lobbyists in his campaign, plus taking money from Fannie and Freddie, which as far as I know, are capitalist systems.

Now apparently he's completely red.

Lets pick one, folks.

Not being funny, but does this mean that you don't think he should be President for being socialist alone? Like this is a veto issue.

Lots of countries have been run by socialists within democracy without self destructing, it's the type of socialist you should worry about? I've included a definition of socialism, yup there are some nutters, but the only thing they all believe in is

'All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly...'

source: en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by davion


I think you just work the system, whichever method works the best.
I just find it odd that with all of the accusations, Obama has not denied them.

and 12m8keall2c, I don't trust that McCain guy either..LOL

The conversation from last night is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In that thread, Agit8dChop rightly pointed out that it might be as simple as
not dignifying the question, with an answer. That's plausible.
It just seems that it would be much easier for Obama to deny it altogether.
It might even push a few fence-sitters into voting Democrat.

This makes him just another bald faced liar. I'm sorry, but folks just don't get to redefine a definition if they don't approve of it.

Me to Obama..."You Mr. Obama fit the DEFINITION of a socialist to a tee. Your face should be posted right beside the definition of socialist in the Webster's Dictionary."

Now prove me wrong.

Originally posted by spacedoubt
Other than mocking those that call him a socialist, or a marxist, why doesn't he just say "no, I'm not"?

Maybe he already has, and I missed it. Please link to a video, or a reliable source if you can.

He has and no you did not miss it *not to bring another thread into this*

Are you deciding there is only one acceptable way of denying it? If so then that is absurd imho.

Many many many people accused McCain of being a Bush Clone and he never flat out denied it. He finally told Obama that 'if he to wanted run against Bush he should have ran in the previous election'. That was not a direct denial, yet it was implied.

We can infer the same implication from Obama's comments (yes comments, not mockery) about McCain's socialist accusations. He chose humor. It was not direct, but he was obviously denying it.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

Honestly, why does it matter? You know his values, character, does whether he sees himself as socialist or not, really matter?

reply to post by spacedoubt

Dont be confounded. That's what i'm here for:

He doesnt say he's not a socialist anymore than McCain stands in front of crowds and says: Honest! I didnt want Sarah, but now i have her and what can i do, you know??
Honest, i'm not a senile old man, really, i can lead. I was a POW for years, thats got to mean something.



Its like somebody calling you ugly then going on tv and saying "I AM NOT!!!!!

I just dont know what to tell you. Would you beleive Obama if he told you he wasnt a socialist?

Remember, what they would really want to call him (they cant) and its a specific color.
So, they go with socialist!!!!!

Originally posted by tmbandt
Me to Obama..."You Mr. Obama fit the DEFINITION of a socialist to a tee. Your face should be posted right beside the definition of socialist in the Webster's Dictionary."

Now prove me wrong.

Okay.

Here is the definition straight out of Webster:

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

www.merriam-webster.com...



[edit on 30-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

If you have studied Obama's economic plan, AND you know what a Socialist is, then you already know he's not a Socialist.

People who are calling him a Socialist are doing so, not because they can't decide whether or not to vote for him. They're fear-mongering. It's not like if Obama flat out denied it, people would suddenly say, "Oh! I'm voting for him, then"!

Source

FOX News - Obama Dismisses Accusations of Socialism

“Socialism!” he said incredulously to a crowd of more than 10,000. “It’s kind of hard to figure how Warren Buffet endorsed me. Colin Powell endorses me and John McCain thinks I’m passing socialism,” he said with more than a hint of disbelief.

Obama explained that he would implement a tax cut for those making under $250,000 - 95% of Americans. “These are the teachers and the janitors who work in our schools. They’re the cops and firefighters who keep us safe. They’re the waitresses who work double shifts, the cashiers at Wal-Marts, the plumbers fighting for the American Dream. John McCain thinks that giving these Americans a break is socialism. Well I call it opportunity, and there is nothing more American than that,” he said.

Obama turned from defense to offense, saying that if John McCain wants to have a debate about redistributing wealth - just look at the Republican nominee’s plan. It’s McCain who would give tax breaks to those who don’t need it and don’t deserve it, Obama said - tax cuts for Fortune 500 CEOs, billions to Wall Street banks, and tax breaks for big oil companies.

Why do you think he might be? You're smart. What has Obama said or done that makes you believe that he's a Socialist (if you do)?

reply to post by 12m8keall2c


In addition that that video. Here is another good one from the Right. Bill O'Reilly admitting 'Sometimes Communism is good, sometimes Socialism is good'.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by tmbandt
Me to Obama..."You Mr. Obama fit the DEFINITION of a socialist to a tee. Your face should be posted right beside the definition of socialist in the Webster's Dictionary."

Now prove me wrong.

Okay.

Here is the definition straight out of Webster:

So let's come in witth some anti comm propoganda. Not many socialists are comms (well, when they leave university)........

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

If it is some of goods, like our military it's not very socialist. If it's all, it's communist. Socialism does some things like health care.

2 a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

This is obviously communism and not like any western european centre left sociaist party.

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Again a specific extremity of the broad socialist movement. It's lovely watching you grapple with this. You are spell bound by the dictionary spelling a propoganda against the Ruskies spell. Shame you're still stuck with it........... it's people control.

spacedoubt, listen to Rachel Maddow tonight. (MSNBC - 9 PM Eastern) She is interviewing Obama. It might be really good.

reply to post by redled


Was that a reply to me or the other member?

You realize I posted that Webster definition only because that member was making a statement based on the alleged Webster definition, right?

[edit on 30-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Rachel is a breath of fresh air! She's awesome!!!!!

She speaks the truth.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
Honestly, I value your opinion. When I see you have posted, I normally read it immediately.

That being said, Is redistribution of wealth not intrinsically Socialist? Is that not the premise? "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need"??

We can split hairs for days here, but it is what it is. Barak is in favor of taking from the haves, and giving it to the have-nots. Right? Wrong? Tell me.

How could he not be a socialist? Every mentor he has had since childhood has been a Marxist, racist, Islamic radical, or an anarchist. His mother was even a Marxist for cryin' out loud. He will be lying....again....when he swears to defend The Constitution of the US on inauguration day. The nation will rue the day it ever heard his name.

reply to post by Hugues de Payens


A Marxist anarchist? That statement is in conflict with itself. Marxist socialism espouses dictatorship. If you don't understand how that conflicts with anarchism then you know nothing about it. You should not be throwing these ideas around. Fear monger.

[edit on 30-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]