The irony of Obama and the New Party association

posted at 2:10 pm on October 9, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Is Barack Obama a socialist?  That seems to be the question after the discovery of documentation showing Obama’s endorsement by Chicago’s New Party, a group that intended to provide cover for socialists seeking public office in Illinois.  The group used its endorsements to highlight members or sympathetic politicians seeking election through the Democratic Party, and according to the documentation discovered, seemed particularly enthusiastic about Obama.

Rick Moran remains skeptical, and a little irritated:

Besides using these radicals to get ahead and making common cause with groups like ACORN and The New Party, it is a legitimate question to ask if Obama shared their ideology. The answer is almost certainly no. I believe that there is something about these radicals that attracted Obama. Perhaps it was their utter certainty and belief that they are in the moral right. Or maybe it was that their personalities are so driven and single minded. Given Obama’s own doubts about his place in the world as a young man as well as his apparent aimlessness early on, it stands to reason that people who believed so strongly in something and seemed to know where they were going in life would be able to interest the young, ambitious politician.

Calling Obama a “socialist” simply isn’t logical. He doesn’t share the belief that industries should be nationalized by the government or even taken over by the workers as many American Marxists espouse. He may not be as wedded to the free market as a conservative but he doesn’t want to get rid of it. He wants to regulate it. He wants “capitalism with a human face.” He wants to mitigate some of the effects of the market when people lose. This is boilerplate Democratic party liberalism not radical socialism.

I detest conservatives throwing around the words “socialism” and “Marxism” when it comes to Obama as much as I get angry when idiot liberals toss around the word “fascist” when describing conservatives. I’m sorry but this is ignorant. It bespeaks a lack of knowledge of what socialism and communism represent as well as an ignorance of simple definitions. Obama will not set up a government agency to plan the economy. He will not as president, require businesses to meet targets for production. He will not outlaw profit. He will not put workers in charge of companies (unless it is negotiated between unions and management. It is not unheard of in this country and the practice may become more common in these perilous economic times.).

An Obama presidency will have more regulation, more “oversight,” more interference from government agencies, more paperwork for business, less business creation, fewer jobs, fewer opportunities. It will be friendlier to unions, more protectionist, and will require higher taxes from corporations (who then will simply pass the tax bill on to us, their customers). But government won’t run the economy. And calling Obama a “socialist” simply ignores all of the above and substitutes irrationalism (or ignorance) for the reality of what an Obama presidency actually represents; a lurch to the left that will be detrimental to the economy, bad for business, but basically allow market forces to continue to dominate our economy.

In other words, Obama is much more of an opportunist than anyone dedicated to socialist principles.  When he needed a boost in the South Side, he flattered the New Party.  When he needed a boost from the Chicago Machine, he allied himself with Richard Daley.  When Obama decided to run for President, he turned into a reformer, the only one who has never actually attempted to reform anything.

I suspect Rick’s closer to the truth on this, but there is a certain irony in this.  The Obama campaign tried to paint Sarah Palin as a dangerous radical and an unpatriotic politician by claiming she belonged to a separatist political party.  It turned out to be drizzly horse manure, which the McCain campaign proved by showing her entire record of party registrations.  We should demand the same from Obama.  Was he always a registered Democrat, or did he register as a member of the New Party at any time?

Rick is also correct in noting that Americans don’t really have a grasp of what socialism means.  In most cases now, what people generally mean is a tendency towards European quasi-socialism, probably most like the Christian Democrat party in Germany.  Bernie Sanders might come close to the real Socialists in France, but most Democrats favor the flabby European hybrid of capitalism and socialism, with its cradle-to-grave entitlement system and its high-tax model for private enterprise.

However, given the economic misfortune of Europe, that’s bad enough.  Barack Obama comes from exactly that kind of political philosophy.  If the New Party endorsement helps make that more clear, then we shouldn’t quibble over terminology.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

It’s on an internet blog, it has to be true.

philnewkirk on October 9, 2008 at 2:12 PM

Rick is also correct in noting that Americans don’t really have a grasp of what socialism means

In Soviet United States, circa 2009, Socialism grasps you.

And points a gun to your head, demanding more money.

lorien1973 on October 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM

I have no doubt he is a Socialist.

After the display of his Hitler youth squads, can there be any doubt?

madmonkphotog on October 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM

In other words, Barack Obama = chameleon.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM

So, why are we just now hearing about this guy, he’s been running for POTUS for over 2 years? Will this nation elect someone and we have no idea who he is?

d1carter on October 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM

Hate to spam across threads but Mac just named Frank and Dodd and tied them to Obama.

WOW.

Bishop on October 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM

My theory?

Opportunist that morphs into totalitarian after the election.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM

Socialist? Close enough.

More than close, it’s right on the money.

Harpoon on October 9, 2008 at 2:15 PM

So, why are we just now hearing about this guy, he’s been running for POTUS for over 2 years? Will this nation elect someone and we have no idea who he is?

d1carter on October 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM

MSM have been running cover and portraying the narrative for 2 years. No serious challenges to his credibility to be a candidate for POTUS.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 9, 2008 at 2:15 PM

Here’s the New Party’s own newsletter from 1996 with Barry’s name under its Illinois candidates:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010306031216/www.newparty.org/up9610.html

That’s a little more than an “Internet blog”….LET’S ROLL!

ex-Democrat on October 9, 2008 at 2:15 PM

Screw this New Party stuff. Screw Ayers. Screw all of that.

McCain has no discernible strategy for explaining those things, and, honestly, he probably can’t. He needs to get out there, hammer Obama on the economy (though, he probably waited to long for that to yeild dividends), and make a show of having a strong, knowledgeable team and plan for the economy.

The media is running interference for Obama, so McCain has very few choices. He needs to get his head out of his ass and do something that has some chance of working… Ayers ain’t it. (Though it is a very real issue, as it says a LOT about Obama’s judgement and his cavalier attitude towards anti-American action, let alone rhetoric.).

DaveS on October 9, 2008 at 2:15 PM

It’s on an internet blog, it has to be true.

philnewkirk on October 9, 2008 at 2:12 PM

Hey phil, what’s your take on socialism and marxism? Enquiring minds want to know.

techno_barbarian on October 9, 2008 at 2:17 PM

McCain needs to challenge Democrats when they say that they own the economy issue. HOW!? It’s just more brainwashing of the public.

Hammer him on the economy and of course yes for being a total socialist.

Grafted on October 9, 2008 at 2:17 PM

In Soviet United States, circa 2009, Socialism grasps you.

And points a gun to your head, demanding more money.

lorien1973 on October 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM

Excellent! You must be channeling Yakov Smirnoff.

J.J. Sefton on October 9, 2008 at 2:17 PM

Who really knows what is in Obama’s mind – other than what his ghostwriter has written in those mawkish books?

HawaiiLwyr on October 9, 2008 at 2:17 PM

Calling Obama a “socialist” simply isn’t logical. He doesn’t share the belief that industries should be nationalized by the government or even taken over by the workers as many American Marxists espouse.

What an idiot! How else do you promise health care as a right without nationalizing the industry?! Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.

jeffersonschild on October 9, 2008 at 2:17 PM

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.” – Norman Thomas, Socialist

RushBaby on October 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM

FINALLY!

Mercy4Me on October 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Hate to spam across threads but Mac just named Frank and Dodd and tied them to Obama.

WOW.

Bishop on October 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM

and named them ‘co-conspirators’ in damaging the American dream, no less. Keep it up, dude.

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Freedom of the Press does not mean they get to pick the POTUS…

d1carter on October 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM

By the way, some guy was screaming at McCain in Wakesha today about why he isn’t fighting Pelosi and the Socialists. Must see TV!

J.J. Sefton on October 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Hate to spam across threads but Mac just named Frank and Dodd and tied them to Obama.

WOW.

Bishop on October 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM

I heard that too! Can’t believe it! He actually named names and came out strong! I came here to see if there was a thread about it.

C’mon Ed and AP! Get the footage up. This is BIG!

techno_barbarian on October 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM

Excellent! You must be channeling Yakov Smirnoff.

J.J. Sefton on October 9, 2008 at 2:17 PM

I started that schtick this morning and I Ed (thanks Ed!) posted up the perfect sentence so it’d make sense.

Fortuitous!

Now I’ll never let it go though!

lorien1973 on October 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM

Obama is most certainly a radical. He just does not look or sound like one.

Not a Socialist? We can only hope. The only other alternative is a full blown communist.

Virginia Shanahan on October 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM

And points a gun to your head, demanding more money.

lorien1973 on October 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM

Ha… like people have money. Riiiiight.

Abby Adams on October 9, 2008 at 2:20 PM

Obama will not set up a government agency to plan the economy. He will not as president, require businesses to meet targets for production. He will not outlaw profit. He will not put workers in charge of companies (unless it is negotiated between unions and management. It is not unheard of in this country and the practice may become more common in these perilous economic times.).

Um, hey Rick! He wont have to create a government agency, we just did that.

Hey Rick, Obama wants to limit profit starting at $250,000.

Hey Rick, what do you think the “bottom-up” approach is, concerning Obama?

Sorry Rick, you fail to convince he isnt a socialist. Sorry, call me ignorant, but if history doesnt teach us that “if you give government a corner of the table, that they wont end up owning the whole thing” doesnt set off alarm bells, well, then you deserve your socialist state.

Me? I will remain vigilant while you pat me on the back and tell me everything is going to be ok.

Government owns your retirement, your income, your house, and half-way your own health. They just gave themselves access to own the financial markets too.

See the forest through the trees Rick, look beyond your nose.

TheHat on October 9, 2008 at 2:20 PM

Jeez…

Anybody who’s studied socialism should know about Fabian socialism–the Webbs, Shaw, Wells, et al. Their concept was to say whatever it took to make their political aspirations palatable in order to gain office and implement their real agenda. The strategy has not been lost over the last hundred years (see: Hillary Clinton). You can google it. They even took their name from the Roman general who kept waltzing the superior Carthaginian force until they simply wore down.

Chaz on October 9, 2008 at 2:20 PM

I don’t like to call him a socialist either. I consider the term “Economic fascist” to be closer to the reality.

Although it is ironic we find this peace of news out when Palin was getting heat for being in a “radical” party of her own, which wasn’t true. I doubt the media is gonna push this until after the election, and if they did, it won’t be within the first few pages on the NYTs of all over CNN or MSNBC.

Trov on October 9, 2008 at 2:21 PM

It is not that he is a “socialist or Marxist” it is that he has an affiliation with these groups. And it has been shown by the record that he does not go against his supporters, he embraces them. He has never voted against party lines, he has never taken on his own party, what in his past shows that he would denounce any of these groups?
It is the number of these people that have entered his life, one after another.
And BTW, next time he talks about McCain not cutting “the rich” taxes, I would hope McCain looks at him and says “that’s easy for you to say, one of your most ardent and wealthiest supporters has already taken his money offshore, George Soros.”

right2bright on October 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM

Moran has one fatal flaw in his thesis…

We really do not know what Obama believes.

Just as he could stay in a Black Militant Church for 20 years, and now say he does not subcribe to its tenents… his past ACTIONS do not support his present Rhetoric.

You CAN judge a Man by the company he keeps. Who he associates with DOES show give an insight into his character.

And more importantly, why would an Ayers type support Barrack Hussein Obama, er… Barry Soetro… er… Barry Obama… (dang, just what is his legal name anyway) if they did not support some of the same goals?

Romeo13 on October 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM

Screw this New Party stuff. Screw Ayers. Screw all of that.

McCain has no discernible strategy for explaining those things, and, honestly, he probably can’t. He needs to get out there, hammer Obama on the economy (though, he probably waited to long for that to yeild dividends), and make a show of having a strong, knowledgeable team and plan for the economy.

The media is running interference for Obama, so McCain has very few choices. He needs to get his head out of his ass and do something that has some chance of working… Ayers ain’t it. (Though it is a very real issue, as it says a LOT about Obama’s judgement and his cavalier attitude towards anti-American action, let alone rhetoric.).

DaveS on October 9, 2008 at 2:15 PM

I think you’re wrong about that, DaveS. You listen to those people at today’s townhall laying down the law to McC/Palin and they’re pissed about BOTH the subprime fiasco AND Obambi’s unsavory associations and bad judgement.

McC’s hitting exactly what he needs to right now. This is resonating with a huge chunk of the American People.

Screw the polls. I don’t believe ANY of them, nor do I have any faith in ANY of our news media, including FNC.

techno_barbarian on October 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM

It looks like this South Carolina Second Amendment Sales Tax Holiday may come just in time for the folks of the Palmetto State.

johnsteele on October 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM

It’s on an internet blog, it has to be true.

philnewkirk on October 9, 2008 at 2:12 PM

Are you declaring it to be untrue, Phil? Have you looked at the links to the Chicago DSA site archives, or any of the other references to Obama as not just someone the party endorsed, but an actual member?

This is not an “internet blog”, Phil.

But if you say it’s not true, we’ll just take your word for it. Sure.

capitalist piglet on October 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM

Are there any conservatives left out their in high places, who is not scared to call a spade a spade?

This is socialism folks!

<blockquote>“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.” - Norman Thomas, Socialist

RushBaby on October 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Couldnt have said it better myself.

Creeping socialism.

TheHat on October 9, 2008 at 2:23 PM

Virginia Shanahan on October 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM

anyone who claims healthcare is a right, is a socialist. Now, it’s up to McCain to explain why that’s a bad thing.

Obama set it up. Can McCain hit it out? Doubtful, but we’ll see.

lorien1973 on October 9, 2008 at 2:23 PM

By the way, some guy was screaming at McCain in Wakesha today about why he isn’t fighting Pelosi and the Socialists. Must see TV!

J.J. Sefton on October 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Sounded good until he used the lame “hooligan” label. Christ don’t we have any conservatives that don’t sound like Ned Flanders? Give me some spit, F-bombs, and baseball bats.

ClassicCon on October 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM

In Soviet United States, circa 2009, Socialism grasps you.

And points a gun to your head, demanding more money.

lorien1973 on October 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM

Excellent! You must be channeling Yakov Smirnoff.

J.J. Sefton on October 9, 2008 at 2:17 PM

More like Bezmanov

techno_barbarian on October 9, 2008 at 2:25 PM

Is Barack Obama a socialist?

Is the Pope Catholic?

HornetSting on October 9, 2008 at 2:25 PM

Calling Obama a “socialist” simply isn’t logical. He doesn’t share the belief that industries should be nationalized by the government or even taken over by the workers as many American Marxists espouse.

I would like to hear each and every step of Rick’s reasoning process that leads him to that conclusion.

“Uhhh–I believe it is true because Obama says it.”

Very convincing.
_________

RJGatorEsq. on October 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM

McCain and Palin are at a rally in Wisconsin and he just named names: Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.

ManlyRash on October 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM

Just as he could stay in a Black Militant Church for 20 years, and now say he does not subcribe to its tenents… his past ACTIONS do not support his present Rhetoric.

You CAN judge a Man by the company he keeps. Who he associates with DOES show give an insight into his character.

And more importantly, why would an Ayers type support Barrack Hussein Obama, er… Barry Soetro… er… Barry Obama… (dang, just what is his legal name anyway) if they did not support some of the same goals?

Romeo13 on October 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM

Have you seen the 1000Sundays video? It goes into Black Liberation Theology, and how whacked it is (declaring that God is not just FOR black people, but AGAINST whites) – and ties Jeremiah Wright to it strongly. It points out that the length of time Obama sat in that church amounts to one thousand Sundays.

It’s hard to imagine you could sit through twenty years of such a thing if you rejected it out of hand.

You can see it at 1000sundays.com.

capitalist piglet on October 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM

I agree with Rick that people on the Right are too quick to shout “socialist” or “commie” without knowing what the words mean. It cheapens the discussion.

(Besides, he has Maxine Waters available if he needs a Socialist.)

However, I do believe Obama is a European-style Social Democrat, and that’s bad enough to be disqualifying, given the empirically failed social and economic policies of European social democracy.

I also think it is quite fair to demand an explanation from Obama of his relationship to the New Party: was he really a member? If not, why is he mentioned as one? Does he subscribe to their beliefs? How much does their ideology still influence him? If he was merely using them, what then does he think that says of his integrity?

Rick is right, but this is still a valid issue.

irishspy on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Obama shows every indication that he is in fact a European style socialist. The reason such socialism is horrible is that it is not the American system. In fact, in some ways European socialism is decidedly anti-American.

JonPrichard on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

He is a socialist.

In marxist-lingo he isn’t a “real” socialist in that he isn’t advocating full collectivism, but rather he is a bourgeois advocating limited socialism.

He is rather a Social Democratic socialist like those from France’s Parti Socialiste.

Democrats used to be Keynesians (meaning they think government spending gets the economy rolling)…

Obama doesn’t want government to spend because it is “better for the economy”, he wants it to spend to increase “fairness”.

That’s what makes him a socialist and not a simple Keynesian.

ebrawer on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Ed, I wouldn’t squabble about how to label Obama. What I would suggest is to lay the facts out on the table and let the voters decide.

But how would you classify Obama and his wife openly campaigning in Kenya on behalf of Raila Odinga (his alleged cousin)?

Raila Odinga incited an insurrection in Kenya when he lost his election. Odinga is a Marxist but lists himself as a “social democrat”….sound familiar?

Captain America on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

I’d have to disagree with Moran’s dismissal.

I’ve got a pretty clear idea of what socialism is, and what communism is. And taking a look at Obama’s life, en toto, it’s really hard to come up with any other explanation other than that someplace deep down, Barack has pretty Marxist or Maoist beliefs.

It isn’t that he merely ‘knew’ or ‘associated’ with the people who’ve popped up as embarrassments for him (Ayers, Wright), but that he actively sought these people out, over a long period of time, and worked hand in hand with them to achieve their stated Marxist/Maoist objectives.

Oh, and btw, I wouldn’t be so quick to discount the Obama machine considering moves as radical as the nationalization of key industries (such as oil) – I’m recalling a piece from a few months back when an Obama spokeswoman tossed out that it might not be a bad idea. . .

No, Obama is a socialist, most likely a Marxist/Maoist. There really isn’t any other plausible explaination for the course of his life.

My complete compilation and analysis is here – A Trajectory Analysis.

Wind Rider on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

But government won’t run the economy

Of course not. they could never ruin the economy. I mean how could they (hint fannie and freddi)

unseen on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

In other words, Barack Obama = chameleon.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM

How did he himself put it? “I am a mirror on which people can see whatever reflection they desire” or some such.

Translation: Still an Empty Suit.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.” – Norman Thomas, Socialist
RushBaby on October 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM

Great quote…. gulp!

This is something that has been causing a big knot in my stomach ever since seeing polls looking like the One might just pull this off (with the help of Acorn Voter Fraud).

tru2tx on October 9, 2008 at 2:28 PM

In my area, the RNC has been running a series of ads on the economy and how it would be harmed by Obama’s tax cuts. The case is being made, but I agree with those who wish McCain would hit harder on that point.

The Great Depression was made “great” and a “depression” with bad policies that included higher taxes and trade protectionism. Guess whose economic advisor supports both?

Slublog on October 9, 2008 at 2:28 PM

DaveS on October 9, 2008 at 2:15 PM

Disagree. McCain has never presented himself as an econ hero. He isn’t going to be able to believably morph into one over the next 20 days.

He does have cred as a reformer and a patriot. Run to your strengths. Realistically, there is probably nobody with a real grasp of how to solve the economic mess. Asking Mac to suddenly be the one with all the answers is unrealistic.

innominatus on October 9, 2008 at 2:29 PM

Bernie Sanders might come close to the real Socialists in France, but most Democrats favor the flabby European hybrid of capitalism and socialism, with its cradle-to-grave entitlement system and its high-tax model for private enterprise.

I thought we already had our own Ponzi scheme–Social Security.

Why not just inform the relatively youthful US Hispanic population–legal and otherwise, that they’re to be the workers for this new cradle to grave scheme? Might bust Barry’s balloon, and earn Mac some Latino votes.

JiangxiDad on October 9, 2008 at 2:30 PM

I like Rick Moran’s Blog, he’s a smart man, and probably one of the best writers on the Internet; but Rick is just plain wrong, as are you Capt’n, if you endorse his view.

The track record is clear, and unequivocable:

a) Obama’s grandfather and grandmother both, were at a minimum, Communist sympathizers, before, and after he was born; this is a fact.

b) Obama’s father, was a dedicated Marxist/Communist; this is a fact.

c) Obama’s mother was raised by Communist sympathizer parents, learned the Communist Manifesto in High School during the 1950′s, and went to a very leftwing Unitarian “Church”, with her parents, known locally in the 1950′s, as “the little Red Church on the Hill”. Several members of the High School Boardh where Obama’s mother went, were investigated for their ties to Communists in the 1950′s; again, these are all FACTS!

d) When Obama’s parents moved to Hawaii, one of the first friends that Obama’s Grandfather made, was radical Anti-American, Anti-White, Racist Pedeophile, Frank Marshall Davis; Obama’s grandfather hung out with Davis, and smoked dope with him; again, all Facts!

c) When Obama returned from Indonesia, to live with his Grandparents, Obama’s grandfather put in the care of Frank Marshall Davis, as his “mentor”!

d) Mysteriously, when Obama is ready to go to College, he ends up in Chicago, in Frank Marshall Davis’ old stomping grounds!

e) One of the first people Obama hooks up with in Chicago, is William Ayers and his wife, Anti-American, Marxist Terrorists; this is NOT a “coincidence”.

d) Obama then proceeds to work for a succession of Marxist influenced organizations, including the Gamaliel Organization, another Marxist organization, that is partnered with the Woods Foundation, that he was tied into with William Ayers; again, ALL FACTS!

f) Obama, then meets, and marries Michelle Obama; a demonstrably proven Anti-American/Anti-White Black Radical; who also has proven Marxist leanings.

g) Obama, also “converts” to “Christianity, and embraces Black Liberation Theology, a Marxist version of Christianity; spouted by none other than Anti-American/Anti-White/Anti-Semitic Racist, and former Muslim/NOI memmber, Jeremiah Wright. Again, all FACTS!

h) Obama also befriends, radical Anti-American/Anti-Semitic/Anti-White Catholic Priest, Pflagger, who though white himself, thinks he is “black”, and who embarces thoroughly, the Marxist Black Liberation Theology, and who promotes it to his own mostly black congregation; again, all Facts!

j) Then, we find out yesterday, that Obama, just happens to belong to a radical Socialist (read Marxist) Leftwing politicdal party called the “New Party”; and you and Rick Moran say it is just a coincidence?

Are you kidding me?

Gee whiz, how much more proof do you people need!

If it waddles like a Socialist/Marxist, Quacks like a Socialist/Marxist, and looks like a Socialist/Marxist….Guess What?? IT IS A SOCIALIST/MARXIST!

Letting Obama off the hook on this stuff Capt’n & Rick, is the EXACT reason this most dangerous politician in my lifetime, will become President of the United States in less than 30 days.

And then, when the truth does come out, everybody will say “But no one told us…”

Yeah…

Dale in Atlanta on October 9, 2008 at 2:30 PM

How did he himself put it? “I am a mirror on which people can see whatever reflection they desire” or some such.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

I didn’t know you could see a socialist in the mirror….oh, that’s right, it’s VAMPIRES you cannot see in the mirror.
Socialist. Marxist. Communist.

It’s 10 pm, do you know where your wallet is?

HornetSting on October 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM

more obfuscation and blurring of the lines. He is posing right now.

tomas on October 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM

My theory?

Opportunist that morphs into totalitarian after the election.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on October 9, 2008 at 2:14 PM

Dr. Cwac, did you quote this earlier on another post? I saw this somewhere today: Ayn Rand: “The difference between a welfare state and a totalitarian state is a matter of time.”

Oink on October 9, 2008 at 2:32 PM

Barry wants to “make government cool again.” Sounds like a socialist to me.

flyfisher on October 9, 2008 at 2:32 PM

Anybody who complains about letting the free market “run wild” is probably a socialist.

WisCon on October 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM

Dr. Cwac, did you quote this earlier on another post? I saw this somewhere today: Ayn Rand: “The difference between a welfare state and a totalitarian state is a matter of time.”

Oink on October 9, 2008 at 2:32 PM

Chilling and inarguable.

flyfisher on October 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM

Someone needs to ask Moran why Obama would go all the way to Africa and campaign for a Marxist if he didn’t subscribe to the ideology.

ChrisM on October 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM

One thing I do agree with – it’s that while the Ayers/Socialist stuff is pretty powerful – the connection that REALLY needs to be made, in plain, simple terms is Obama’s work with ACORN to push through the policy, and his judicial work in the trenches (Citi) that created the sub-prime mess in the first place.

The case can, and should, be made that instead of nebulous “Republican Policies” for the last 8 years, a better reason for this mess is specifically the policy Obama pushed, and worked to implement at ground level.

People trusted his version of “Hope” once before – and now we’re ALL getting screwed.

And we want to give him a turn at bat in the ‘Big Game’?

Wind Rider on October 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM

Barry wants to “make government cool again.” Sounds like a socialist to me.

Welcome to Da’ Club. May I get you a drink? Possibly, some Obama Kool-aid? We are the “cool” kids.

HornetSting on October 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM

What’s good for the Goose is good for the gander. Club him over the head with the allegation. He wants to run out the clock. Force ‘em to play defense.

Iblis on October 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM

Whenever there is a discussion of this sort, there is too much quibling over the variations of collectivism. Whether Obama is a socialist, a Marxist or a communist matters as much as being killed by a bullet, an arrow or hammer.

The point is, capitalism, free enterprise and individualism is dead and along with it, the greatest country to ever exist.

Star20 on October 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM

I thought we already had our own Ponzi scheme–Social Security.

Why not just inform the relatively youthful US Hispanic population–legal and otherwise, that they’re to be the workers for this new cradle to grave scheme? Might bust Barry’s balloon, and earn Mac some Latino votes.

JiangxiDad on October 9, 2008 at 2:30 PM

I firmly believe this was why McCain pushed for an amnesty bill. In less than a decade, the social security Ponzi scheme will be taking in less than it gives out, unless a whole lot of new young workers are incorporated into the system, deferring the collapse a few more years.

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM

I’m sorry but this is ignorant. It bespeaks a lack of knowledge of what socialism and communism represent as well as an ignorance of simple definitions. Obama will not set up a government agency to plan the economy. He will not as president, require businesses to meet targets for production. He will not outlaw profit.

Hmmm I guess you guys never read Obama’s energy plan:

Obama supports implementation of a market-based cap-and-trade
system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990
levels by 2050. Obama will start reducing emissions immediately in his administration by establishing
strong annual reduction targets, and he’ll also implement a mandate of reducing emissions to 1990
levels by 2020.
In contrast to other approaches like a carbon tax, cap-and-trade programs provide maximum assurances
that emissions will decline to desired levels by the targeted dates. A cap-and-trade program draws on
the power of the marketplace to reduce emissions in a cost-effective and flexible manner

…Flip Incentives to Energy Utilities: Obama will work to “flip” incentives to state and local utilities
by ensuring companies get increased profits for improving energy efficiency, rather than higher
energy consumption. Currently, utilities make profits when consumers purchase more energy, and
when consumers purchase energy at peak times when energy prices are higher because of greater
demands on the system. This decoupling of profits from increased energy usage will incentivize
utilities to partner with consumers and the federal government to reduce monthly energy bills for
families and businesses. Obama will provide early adopter grants and other financial assistance
from the federal government to states that implement this energy efficient policy…..

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pdf/EnergyFactSheet.pdf

So Obama dies want to:set up a government agency to plan the economy. He does want to: require businesses to meet targets for production 9Co2). And yes he even wants to : outlaw profit by changing how those profits are made.

I think we know socialism when we see it. socialism is not communism Communism is a form of socialism. Obama’s father and his mentor (Frank Marshall) were both communists.

Ed you need to do more research on this. you are wrong. his plan is full of socialism. Check it out.

unseen on October 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM

First of all, Rick is the same guy that says no one will care about Ayers etc. Also, I don’t think Rick’s feelings on what people say are relevant. The path is socialism is a series of steps, not a big change. You can’t slide to the left if people aren’t farther left pulling in that direction. You’ll note Rick uses the word “radical” to qualify socialism, because socialism itself doesn’t provide enough juxtaposition to “liberalism”.

In other words, Obama is much more of an opportunist than anyone dedicated to socialist principles. When he needed a boost in the South Side, he flattered the New Party. When he needed a boost from the Chicago Machine, he allied himself with Richard Daley. When Obama decided to run for President, he turned into a reformer, the only one who has never actually attempted to reform anything.

This is a mistaken assumption, and one people would like to believe. Just because you are a blank slate, doesn’t mean you don’t believe in something. He is unquestionably an opportunist, yes, but what does his track record show? Why ideology has he not gone against? Trampling a small party for a bigger opportunity means nothing more then Paul running on a R ticket instead of Libertarian.

Don’t be so quick to whitewash for comfort sakes.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM

Rick Moran, like to many so-called “conservative” writers today, has his head stuck in his butt.

He rushes to give Osama Obama the benefit of the doubt re socialistic leanings (or outright adherence) because Obama hasn’t said he’s a socialist.

The fact that people like Moran can get deeply into nuance regarding one who roosts with bombers/terrorists, felons, murderous goons and racists shows how separated they are from reality.

Reality is blue-shirted truth squads, suppression of dissent, and confiscation of our assets to support Obama’s preferred cronies.

MrScribbler on October 9, 2008 at 2:38 PM

Socialism … Communism, what’s the difference? Oh, gunpoint!

Yes, he’s a Socialist.

Conservative_SAHM on October 9, 2008 at 2:38 PM

I have not studied socialism and do not understand if Senator Obama is a socialist or not. In my career, however, I have seen the results of entitlement programs and understand that they simply take my hard earned money and give it to people who decided not to work towards the American dream, to squander their opportunities, and who frankly, do not deserve handouts. Most were not because of a tough break in life, or because of some mistreatment from society, but because they decided on that lifestyle.

I believe that Senator Obama wants even more of that than what we have today, and it is a powerful message to people who do not want to work, and simply want things handed to them. That is not socialism I know, but I believe that it is still very dangerous to America and its middle class.

kam582 on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

irishspy on October 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Black Liberation Theory has strong components of marxism. Frank Marshall Davis believed in the revolution. Obama’s parents were socialist. Read between the lines in Michelle Obama’s verbal droppings. Ayers and Dohrn are marxist.

a capella on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

Honestly, I think to many people the word “socialism” (especially to younger people) isn’t such a bad word (unfortunately) because we pretty much know that many European countries are socialist or quasi-socialist and I don’t see them as “evil” or anything like that. Fascism does have a bad connotation to Americans and all across the world, however.

terryannonline on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

However, given the economic misfortune of Europe, that’s bad enough. Barack Obama comes from exactly that kind of political philosophy. If the New Party endorsement helps make that more clear, then we shouldn’t quibble over terminology.

Agree with you, Ed. I don’t know who Rick Moran is, but he appears to be too in love with his own intelligence and slavishness to precise definitions to see the “truth” of Barack Obama. Sometimes that truth goes beyond the finite definition of a word to an overriding philosophy that will ultimately enslave this republic, no matter what label you choose to hang on the scumbag that brings it about.

SKYFOX on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

I need to read Ayn Rand. I see her quoted here all the time….

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

It’s on an internet blog, it has to be true.

philnewkirk on October 9, 2008 at 2:12 PM

It was on the party’s official website.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM

I’m not quite sure the Ayers thing is exactly “successful” by the look of the polls.

amerpundit on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

It turned out to be drizzly horse manure,

:)

Ed, I see you are coming around!

Welcome to HotAir!!

Mcguyver on October 9, 2008 at 2:40 PM

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

You’ve never?

Oh man. Atlas Shrugged. I’ll read like a newspaper. Cuz it’s all coming true.

Fountainhead didn’t resonate with me.

Her shorter works are all excellent though.

lorien1973 on October 9, 2008 at 2:40 PM

After writing an editorial column on the socialist, Marxist and communist elements of today’s Democratic Party and Barack Obama, himself, someone wrote to me to tell me that I was an idiot who didn’t even understand that “communism” doesn’t even really exist! He told me that it was simply an idea. I replied to him that yes, communism DOES exist, just as “communists” exist. I know THEY exist, because I reached out and touched them with my 20MM cannon, in 1968.

Star20 on October 9, 2008 at 2:41 PM

I thought we already had our own Ponzi scheme–Social Security.

Why not just inform the relatively youthful US Hispanic population–legal and otherwise, that they’re to be the workers for this new cradle to grave scheme? Might bust Barry’s balloon, and earn Mac some Latino votes.

JiangxiDad on October 9, 2008 at 2:30 PM
I firmly believe this was why McCain pushed for an amnesty bill. In less than a decade, the social security Ponzi scheme will be taking in less than it gives out, unless a whole lot of new young workers are incorporated into the system, deferring the collapse a few more years.

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM

Interesting comment. I just saw the documentary Demographic Winter: The Decline of the Human Family. It shows what is happening throughout the western world. In some European countries the phenomenon is advanced and they are toast within 30-50 years. The US is holding it’s own with a replacement rate of 2.1 thanks to the right-wing and immigrants, but that’s all we are doing. We are not growing as we must to keep the ponzi balls in the air. I wonder how different the picture would look if it were not for abortion.

flyfisher on October 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM

I’m not quite sure the Ayers thing is exactly “successful” by the look of the polls.

amerpundit on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

If you are basing your opinion on the polls (which may or may not factor this in) suit yourself.

I, for one, think two things: 1 – bloggers are over saturated adn think people know all the stuff they’ve already been exposed to. They don’t, and I’ve heard Ayers being talked about now offline. 2 – it’s a setup for a string of “questions” about Obama’s calling card, his judgment. I think it sets up the remainder of what is coming, it’s not a one-shot deal.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2008 at 2:44 PM

The guy’s mentor was a Commie! His parents were Commies! He studied the tactics of a Commie. His worked for a Commie organization, but he’s not a Commie? F’in moron!

TheBigOldDog on October 9, 2008 at 2:44 PM

In some European countries the phenomenon is advanced and they are toast within 30-50 years. The US is holding it’s own with a replacement rate of 2.1 thanks to the right-wing and immigrants, but that’s all we are doing. We are not growing as we must to keep the ponzi balls in the air. I wonder how different the picture would look if it were not for abortion.

flyfisher on October 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM

Our picture would be about 40 million people better without abortion. On the immigration front, we are doing a bit better than Europe, only because they are importing moslems.

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:44 PM

Oh man. Atlas Shrugged. I’ll read like a newspaper. Cuz it’s all coming true.

Is it in public domain yet (and therefore available online legally) or do I need to renew my library card?

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM

we pretty much know that many European countries are socialist or quasi-socialist and I don’t see them as “evil” or anything like that.

Fascism does have a bad connotation to Americans and all across the world, however.

terryannonline on October 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM

All this hoopla is worth it just to root out you socialists.

Now hurry and move to Venezuela.

Mcguyver on October 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM

Have you seen the 1000Sundays video? It goes into Black Liberation Theology, and how whacked it is (declaring that God is not just FOR black people, but AGAINST whites) – and ties Jeremiah Wright to it strongly. It points out that the length of time Obama sat in that church amounts to one thousand Sundays.

capitalist piglet on October 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM

I’ve thought for months now that the Republicans were foolish not to widely publicize the tenets of Obama’s so-called “Christian” faith. White voters who are comforted by the fact that Obama claims to be a “Christian” might not be so comforted if they knew how Obama and his church actually define that word: you’re a “Christian” in Obama’s church if you reject American middle-class values, if you pledge your allegiance to the “motherland” of Africa, if you believe that God should be on the side of blacks and against whites, and if you believe that God should be killed if he fails to side with blacks.

Not the kind of “Christianity” most of us learned about in Sunday School, is it?

AZCoyote on October 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM

I firmly believe this was why McCain pushed for an amnesty bill. In less than a decade, the social security Ponzi scheme will be taking in less than it gives out, unless a whole lot of new young workers are incorporated into the system, deferring the collapse a few more years.

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM

Easiest way to solve social security is in place… the outrageous inflation we will have from all this money being dumped into the system should pretty much solve social security…

CC

CapedConservative on October 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM

Ed you need to do more research on this. you are wrong. his plan is full of socialism. Check it out.

unseen on October 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM

Well done.

Spirit of 1776 on October 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM

Is it in public domain yet (and therefore available online legally) or do I need to renew my library card?

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM

Don’t you have a Half-Price Books nearby? You could get one for $5. I have four copies, which I try to keep loaned out (all are out right now, or I’d mail it to you).

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM

Don’t you have a Half-Price Books nearby? You could get one for $5. I have four copies, which I try to keep loaned out (all are out right now, or I’d mail it to you).

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM

The name doesn’t sound familiar. There is a used-book/electronics store I frequent regularly, I could probably check there.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM

the outrageous inflation we will have from all this money being dumped into the system should pretty much solve social security…

CC

CapedConservative on October 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM

Actually, the answer has already been written, but not voted on – means testing for SS benefits. If you saved money while working, you don’t get SS. In other words, punish the responsible and reward the foolish. Very government, baby.

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM

Mcguyver on October 9, 2008 at 2:45 PM

I fundamentally disagree with socialism, of course. However, Spain is run by a socialist party. I don’t think anyone in America would consider Spain “evil.” Do you?

terryannonline on October 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM

What difference does it make, we’re all socialist already.

ballz2wallz on October 9, 2008 at 2:49 PM

Is Barack Obama a socialist?

You’ll have an easier time proving that than proving that he’s not. My question is why people haven’t already figured this out. This is what the election is all about. Leftist/Dem White House and Congress with a socialist Chicago-style machine and Soros money. No investigations into the voter fraud or anything else damaging to Dems. Show me the plan for a Rpeublican taking back any major office. Not to mention the Supreme Court make-up in a couple of years. All of this and a favorable media. Why no one wants to hang the Dems with the socialist/communist tag and make them defend against that is beyond me.

genso on October 9, 2008 at 2:51 PM

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM

Two locations in your state:

Mesa, Superstition Springs
Phoenix, Paradise Valley

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:52 PM

This is boilerplate Democratic party liberalism not radical socialism.

Really? Since when? Would that be before or after J.F.K.’s presidency? Before or after the Vietnam War?

Buy Danish on October 9, 2008 at 2:53 PM

the outrageous inflation we will have from all this money being dumped into the system should pretty much solve social security…

CC

CapedConservative on October 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM

We are in a deflationatry environment. I wish we had inflation. Inflation means assets like houses and stocks go up not down.

unseen on October 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM

We are in a deflationatry environment. I wish we had inflation. Inflation means assets like houses and stocks go up not down.

unseen on October 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM

So would you rather have $4.00/gal gasoline or your retirement fund? Or a job.

Increase in gas prices were a sign of high economic activity. It was a “good thing” the problem was wages did not keep up because of globalization. therefore the economy hit a wall. If wages were rising with inflation the economy could have continued on with good growth,

unseen on October 9, 2008 at 2:56 PM

The answer is almost certainly no.

Of course, I mean, people always get so close to radical leftists and don’t share their views.

I guess it’s possible that Barry was just posing, but how does this idiot explain Barry’s MOST LIBERAL VOTING RECORD???

This Moran guy is a dumb-f.

benrand on October 9, 2008 at 2:56 PM

Mesa, Superstition Springs
Phoenix, Paradise Valley

Vashta.Nerada on October 9, 2008 at 2:52 PM

Paradise Valley is out of the question, I live in south-central Tempe which is a bit of a trip especially for someone stuck relying on the bus system. I’ll look up the Mesa location though, might have better luck there.

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 2:58 PM

Comment pages: 1 2