Obama the conservative? compared to...

[TnHilltopper]

Just a follow up and a bit of a chuckle. Admit cries, shouts and even screams of socialist, fascist, communist, uber liberal from planet San Fran, etc... As once predicted, the opposition from the right is right on the mark, no surprise there. However, the thing folks seem to have missed is that is very well may be Democrats of the liberal flavor who are going to most rail against Obama.

Granted, the health care speech Obama appealed to outright liberalism, but it was something of a surprise to many as Obama has went to great lengths to be far more centrist than anyone would have imagined a year ago.

Concerning the wars in the Middle East, Obama is facing his toughest opposition from Democrats and may need the support of Republicans to further his vision. Come again...

Obama recently signed a bill to expand gun owners rights and the right to carry concealed in national parks. Obama has also expanded George W. Bush's warrantless wiretapping program and broadened the government's legal argument for immunizing his Administration and government agencies from lawsuits. Obama has gone well beyond Bush's legal claims, leaving nearly every liberal and many Republicans stunned.

Gitmo may be done, but let me interest you in a trip to Bagram Airbase, where business as usual is carried out. No need to have that pesky press, watch dog groups, and human rights folks poking their nose into a good thing, huh.

And so the list goes on and leaving one to wonder, will things get to the point where the Liberal caucus will choose to run one of their own in 2012? I realize Obama aspires and admires Abraham Lincoln and his efforts to fight a nation splitting battle and forge a new era, but it is looking more like he may end up "Jimmy Cartered".

[GregW]

So long as he does not wind up "Abraham Lincolned".

I am at odds with some of Obama's proposals but I am also at odds with the wishy washy Democratic Party. My economics are far to the left of acceptable in American politics. My stand on individual liberties is far to the right. So what, they are mine and do not have to be anyone else’s.

I do agree with his measures supporting American’s rights to carry firearms where they want to be armed. We should eliminate the restriction on concealed carry on aircraft and other mass transit. A plane full of armed civilians is far less dangerous than a plane with a couple of armed terrorists and a couple hundred disarmed passengers.

[TnHilltopper]

While we are not even a year into the Obama Presidency, I'm already curious as to how history is going to view him. As it is thus far, I think he has baffled a good many more people than was originally thought.

[zz4guy]

He DID sound conservative on the campaign trail. I even considered voting for him over McCain because his policies weren't much different. But ever since he's took office we are seeing the real Barack Obama. Hard core left socialist who makes Chavez look like a moderate.

[TnHilltopper]

Originally Posted by zz4guy

He DID sound conservative on the campaign trail. I even considered voting for him over McCain because his policies weren't much different. But ever since he's took office we are seeing the real Barack Obama. Hard core left socialist who makes Chavez look like a moderate.

While I will certainly agree that nationalized health care is more socialist than not, we are already a socialist nation. Then again, every society is a socialist endeavor after all.

All things considered, both Democrats and Republicans agree on about 75-80% of health care reform, so to that extent, even Republicans desire moving towards more socialism.

[GregW]

Socialism, in itself, is not evil. It is the codifications of the way groups of people, societies if you will, help each other survive individual crises. When socialism is abused by totalitarians it becomes just another means for the few to dominate the many, generally for the power and/or wealth of the few. Socialism is misunderstood by many because of a very effective propaganda campaign by the few that are willing to take from the many for their own benefit.

These business leaders frequently use a form of investor socialism to protect themselves from the discipline of an actual market by arranging for the society, through a government they control, to allow market distortions such as monopolies, no bid government contracts, price setting, and ultimately government bailouts when the speculative bubbles the businesses create ultimately fail. In its worst form this exclusive socialism is combining it with totalitarianism and results in a corrupt economy and a fascist government of the few by the few and for the few with out any effective law, market discipline or limits to its excesses.

A really effective socialism encourages capital investment in an actual open and free market by keeping the corrupt businesses from destroying that market. Effective socialism provides for funding necessary activities ranging from paying for a standing military force to providing for proper care for the sick and elderly that cannot work. IMHO how a society cares for the incapable is a better definition of its humanity than how it cares for its privileged.

I do not see how a socialistic economy restricts an individual from achieving what ever they desire although funding the government with steeply progressive taxes makes reaching the top of the top of the economic heap more difficult for the fanatical Mammonites. What a socialist economy does do is restrict the depth to which an individual can fall, and the people, like his family, he can take with him, by providing a generous safety net for everybody. Even a heavily socialized economy will still create zillionaires but will have far fewer starving in the dark of a winter night.

This is why I prefer a socialized economy over a corrupt monopolized false capitalism.