New "Socialist" Label on Old Democratic Ideas

[roxybeast]

New "Socialist" Label on Old Democratic Ideas


The national news has been reporting that the McCain campaign's newest attack is to try to paint Obama as a "socialist." OMG! Fear. Run.

Maybe this is all part of the Republican's divide and conquer strategy. Instead of trying to bring the country together in these desperate times, they seem to insist on fear-mongering as a campaign strategy, pushing untrue personal attacks, wild speculation, and hate-based rhetoric. While Obama's ads may have exaggerations here or there, at least they are almost all focused on actual policy issues, like health care, the economy, the war, the environment, etc. - and not wild distorted personal attacks on McCain, his patriotism, or loyalty to this country. Fear the Muslim.

Someone recently sent me this editorial from Investor's Business Daily, claiming that it was a neutral source and thus entirely credible. The reality is that IBD runs editorials slanted towards the right and slanted towards the left. This one, entitled "Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism" highly slants towards the far, far, right:

http://www.investors.com/editorial/edit ... 7342405551

It is an editorial from a very right wing author (who does not have the balls to put his name on it) that basically is pushing the new McCain attack that Obama is a "socialist."

First, I doubt that this guy even knows what socialism or marxism mean or has ever read any detailed historical teachings on the subjects.

Second, he puts quotes around "community organizer" as if helping poor black folks be free from inhaling asbestos in their living quarters is somehow a bad thing. The author just includes the words "socialist" and "marxist" as his very right wing opinionated labels ... not based on anything Obama has actually said ... it is the utmost in right wing spin and stretches the truth quite dramatically to justify the author's biased conclusion.

Third, Obama does want to revert to a tax scheme which reduces the burden on the poor and middle class and slightly raises the burden on the rich and on big corporations - note that this is virtually the same plan that was in place before Bush's tax cuts were enacted ... and Bush's tax cuts are based on the idea that if you make the rich richer they will "trickle down" their wealth to the poor and middle class ... an outdated and false idea which the recent economic crises and stock market crash has proven is just bullshit. This approach to taxes was not "socialist" when it existed prior to Bush's tax cuts, nor is it "socialist" now; this is merely a NEW label and spin put on an idea that this country has actually operated under before (e.g., under the Clinton administration - which yielded the largest economic growth in recent US history).

Fourth, Obama does want to help the poor and working middle class. He wants to increase the minimum wage (which as you know is insufficient to actually live on - if you think it isn't, I dare you to try paying all your bills and for food/necessities and renting a decent place to live on what you can make in a month on minimum wage). If you've ever tried to live only off the current minimum wage, you know this is not a bad thing and is actually necessary. Enacting programs that encourage college education and promote child care through tax credits or scholarships is actually a good thing.

Providing a means for all citizens, not just the wealthy, to have necessary and emergency health care is a good thing ... why should only the rich or those fortunate enough to have a job which provides nice insurance be protected from health disasters? The reality is that when poor or middle income families without insurance get sick, they lose their jobs, lose their homes, and become a burden on the rest of society (and particularly on those complaining the loudest) ... they don't pay taxes, they increase unemployment numbers, they start qualifying for welfare, food stamps & medicare benefits that they wouldn't otherwise need ... all of which can usually be avoided by providing preventative health care as Obama proposes. I see this as actually being something that improves the production capacity of American workers & raises all of our standards of living ... which are good things.

The people who criticize universal health care on the right as "socialist" don't ever seem to address or even know that it is actually more costly to our economy, society and taxpayers in general not to have it. Isn't it better for these folks to be working and contributing to the economy, society and taxes, and to try to get them working as quickly as possible after an injury, rather than allowing them to be a drain on our economy, society and the national debt because they could not adequate afford health care or insurance? Republicans apparently favor the latter approach. An elitist approach. An uncaring and inhumane approach. If they don't have insurance, it's just because they are poor lazy slobs, ... and not because they can't afford it despite working two jobs 60 or more hours a week, or because of layoffs or plant closings or circumstances beyond their control, etc., etc. Ultimately, as humans, we should care enough about each other to help each other when we are hurt. It is the right thing to do. It is the moral thing to do.

Barack Obama is no more "socialist" than Bill Clinton or JFK ... this is merely the right wing's desperate attempt to put a new "label" on long-standing Democratic party ideas because they sense they are going to lose this election badly. It is the utmost in political spin. A truly desperate attack. And a poor one at that.

Peace,
Beth Isbell

©2008 WCI Media