John McCain says Barack Obama’s tax policies are “socialist.”
Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Saturday accused Democratic rival Barack Obama of favoring a socialistic economic approach by supporting tax cuts and tax credits McCain says would merely shuffle wealth rather than creating it.
Look, we have Social Security, Medicare, and bank bailouts. To paraphrase the old joke, we’ve already established what we are. Now we’re just haggling over the price. Old John already voted for the bank bailouts. So, “socialism” isn’t the sticking point. Wealth transfers from ordinary people’s tax dollars to the banking class is apparently o.k. All I can surmise about McCain’s objection to Obama’s tax plans is that it might benefit the middle or lower class.
His “buy your neighbor’s house at full price, sell it back to him for half” plan would be probably the most socialistic program this country even enacted.
I had the sense to buy a cheap house, which is paid for. Why does John McCain think I should pay for other peoples’ houses, too? John’s a goddamn commie.
If you watch any of the videos that have been taken outside of the McCain/Palin rallies they’re all yelling “socialist” or “communist”. They don’t know the difference but more importantly you can almost predict that the next words out of their mouth will be that they don’t want their hard earned money going to some “fu%^&* [insert racial epithet]”
Comrade Doug: Those *#&%()@ Repubs co-opted our socialist agenda. I was so looking forward to a purge. And imagine the excitement of the show trials on reality TV. ‘Got to hand it to them though. We were just going to redistribute a little of the wealth back our way. They got the government to own whole banks!
They certainly don’t know the difference. Anyone watching saw the Republicans grow government with abandon. The only way I’m concerned about the Democrats outstripping Republican largesse is that the path will be clear, with the same majorities that led to the same excess, thinking 1964 here.
It’s sick, but my best political hope would be gridlock… except that it would mean voting for McCain & Palin. *sigh*
You called it. We’ve got socialism. Both of these POTUS candidates voted for the socialist bailout bill whereby the the middle class and poor of America bailout the rich on Wall Street.
I’ve come to the conclusion lately that the majority of people favor socialism.
Isn’t that what governments *do*? We’re all pooling our money together (taxes) to help each other. Sometimes it is for things like highways, sometimes it is for things like bailouts. They’re all socialism, we’re just talking about what degree we socialize.
For example, if you think there should be no socialism at all, build your own road to your house. I shouldn’t be taxed for it!
(FYI, I think the bailout is a load of crap as well, but to say that all socialism = evil isn’t quite so…)
Colin Powell’s endorsement of Obama puts the whole repetoire of conservative talk show spin into perspective.What perspective does is help us all see a balanced context for one-sided commentary. Powell is one of the few bonafide conservatives who can get by saying that Obama is a Christian and not a Muslim,but so what if he ‘were’ a Muslim?
Then Powell went up to read the epitaph of an American Muslim lad who gave his life for his country ( the USA) in battle.For a certain segment of Americans there is no such thing as ‘an American Muslim’.
Powell also brought to task MCCain’s choice of Palin’s as VP and he stated that was when he really started to question McCain’s judgment.
Powell decried the negativism and divisiveness of the McCain campaign and finished with a glowing endorsement of Obama for President, whom he thought would be a capable, thinking, innovative new kind of president,’just what we need’. This was great stuff,epecially considering McCain and Powell have been longtime friends.
Democrats should just replay and replay Powell’s’ half hour endorsement of Obama. Powell may be discredited by liberals,but he has not been by conservatives,and they will have to give pause for what he said.
I just received an E-mail from older longtime Dutch friends who watched all the debates on Dutch TV and they are wondering if Americans will really elect a non-white president.This is the big question in Europe. They see Obama as by far the best candidate and the only reason he could lose, in their view, is that he is Black. The people I make contact with think this way,and it is a widespread European view.
Violence and race problems often come up as two longstanding American cultural problems from Europeans.
For what it’s worth ,to the French, I come across as a typical conservative American defending American values,but I can do it in fluent French, and that gives me points.
Poor Colin Powell. He’s the plaything of either side, depending upon the moment. Lost face with one side for his presentation of the war… until useful enough to give an endorsement.
The comments, even the recent ones, on this You Tube clip of Powell’s UN speech for the war are amazing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYBA9JD5oW4
You get to the point where it’s hard to believe anybody putting stock into a guy like Powell. Of course the Dems love to laugh at the Republicans because of the perception, but as was stated on this blog before, Powell doesn’t really have a lot of credibility.
What several political pundits have said of Powell make sense:Powell wants his legacy to be having supported Obama’s presidency,not for having lied in front of the United Nations.
It’s not clear that Powell knew the case for WMD was bogus at the time, and he was just presenting the case for the Bush Administration gave him,which makes his Obama support even more of a stark contrast,especially for conservatives. Conjecture is conjecture.
Sure have heard a lot of commentary from Dems that Powell lied, knew about the state of WMDs, and simply backed his president, and lacks integrity. Read such comments here. Now he’s a good guy… because now he’s backing the right team.
I tire of either Republicans or Democrats talking about integrity. Such crocks.
There was apparently a lot of additional stuff prepared for Powell’s UN speech that he refused to say because it was so poorly sourced.
That being said, he was the guy who held up the vial of baby powder and said, “If this were anthrax…” Pure silliness.
But he was the originator of the “Powell Doctrine”, which the current administration opted against in favor of Cheney’s smaller force ideas. So in that respect he still represents a pragmatism that has been lacking in our leadership during the last several years, to our detriment.
Ah, Mike Kole has the right of it today. Political integrity (an oxymoron, IMO) has been in awfully short supply for quite some time.