The “S” word
The right’s favorite word is now “socialist.” It’s used so often and in relation to so many issues that it’s lost all meaning. Actually nationalizing a company or industry is a socialist move. Simply propping up a failing bank or institution is not. If Obama is a socialist for giving capital and loans to teetering banks, then so is George W. Bush and his father along with Ronald Reagan. The younger Bush began the bank “bailout” that Obama has continued. Reagan and his successor bailed out hundreds of failed Savings and Loan institutions in the 80’s and early 90’s. I think they all made the right decision.
Obama acts while McCain twitters…
March 20th, 2009 at 12:31 am
We’ve been taught to hate and fear Socialism, by it’s most told of association, The Communists / Russia / Soviets etc, aka “The Enemy”. The Bad Guys, the ones who all “real” Patriots should hate, and despise all the principles they embody. That other place across the world from us, full of atheists and those who put the community above themselves, hence Commun-ists.
I did go to one of the internet’s most trusted sources of unbiased information to see for myself {and others lol} if that word was really all that bad, see for yourselves!: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/socialist
Now we can see the only context many know this word under is the USSR version, and those who’re overusing it now are counting on this, otherwise the crutch of their beliefs {and in cases their Political/Entertainment&Both- Careers!} begins to not support them as well as say a Socialized Health Care System would.
I am a Patriotic American, born and bred {and barn lol} but I have the inherent right to oppose and dispute those who would stand in the way of that which I feel to the best of my knowledge would help me and those in my immediate concern out the best.
March 23rd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
For a less dramatic form of socialism than the Soviet, look at postwar United Kingdom. Socialist, yet democratic, policies brought it to near poverty by the late 1970’s, when Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister. Much of the U.K.’s recent economic vitality, up to about six months ago when everybody started to go under, was due largely to the capitalistic changes she and her party implemented.
The French have considered themselves largely social democrats, yet less than a decade ago, the government tried to impose a 35 hour work week as a measure to reduce unemployment. See how well it worked.
Finally, in a TV appearance with Phil Donahue, Milton Friedman summarized the problem with Socialism pretty well:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A
The worst part about this current economic crisis is that there aren’t any examples outside of capitalism showing how to get out. Lots of theories, but no practical examples.
March 27th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
The economic breakdown in Russia I’ve heard attributed to it’s socialist methodology too, maybe that’s why the concern whenever it seems the preachers to the choir activate that keyword for the masses. Maybe They weren’t doing Socialism right, maybe We aren’t doing Capitalism right. Still looking at the words, one looks like a system more for the Social good, when the other one does seem to run on an upper class Capitalizing on someone else. If you have no problem with capitalism, you probably haven’t been {know you’ve been} capitalized on, yet. Maybe there’s something inbetween the benefits everyone.
March 30th, 2009 at 11:45 am
It doesn’t matter to me what you call it but that I will pay for it. let Americans keep their money and not have to support an ever growing government. I also would like to see our politicians show Amercans how they are cutting back to cut the cost of government to the tax payer. So many people are hurting in my circle of friends and none of this stimulus is going to make a difference to them. No money for teachers, but let’s build new schools right now. No, whatever you call it and whatever party is in charge; it makes no sense to me.
April 2nd, 2009 at 11:58 pm
That’s a perfectly reasonable request too. Absolute transparency in government spending.
I was thinking, some argue that once the money leaves your hands it’s no longer your’s, both in shopping / taxpaying, but the taxation with representation obligation still holds.
Here’s a compromise though, more of the right type of government, less of the wrong type? Hard part’s agreeing on what that is.
April 6th, 2009 at 11:57 am
I wonder if term limits would change what goes on in government or a strong third party? Something has to happen to change the status quo for the better. I just don’t understand why more people aren’t upset that they are not getting their tax money worth out of our government. If it was a comopany then the howl would be heard across the country.