If Obama's a Socialist, So is McCain
By Nicholas Provenzo
Chairman of the Center for the Advancement of Capitalism
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama isn’t an outright socialist as some have alleged. That is, he doesn't call for the explicit government ownership of all the means of production. Nevertheless, both he and Republican candidate John McCain are equally dangerous for economic freedom in America. On every question, both men share the same corrupt moral premise, differing only in degree and their particular focus. At root, both men condemn personal accountability and independence.
Just take the root cause of our current financial crisis. Americans all want to own their own homes, even if everyone can’t be trusted to make the payments. So they’ve allowed government agencies to impose artificial rules on banks and the housing market. The predictable result has been a financial house of cards that has ignited a global recession, resulting in our government adding hundreds of billions of dollars to the public debt to prevent foreclosed homeowners from bearing the responsibility for their own poor financial choices. Worse, it has done so with the support of both political parties.
Neither Obama nor McCain stands against these flawed policies in any meaningful way. Instead, both men promise to expand the power of government to regulate our lives.
Obama proposes a socialized healthcare scheme, where the cost for healthcare is not borne by the patient. He also advocates a plan to force us into alternative energy, even if it makes no economic sense. Meanwhile, McCain promises to "take on" drug companies (who create life-saving medicines) and proposes to "cap and trade" emissions from our businesses, despite increasingly contradictory claims from climate-change alarmists. And, perhaps most disturbing, both men promise to further regulate the "greed" on Wall Street, as if arresting some businessmen for their "greed" will inspire other businessmen to invest anew.
These socialist streaks in both candidates mean that whether it’s Obama or McCain that move into the Oval Office, American’s essential problems will continue. That doesn't mean all hope is lost. We need a new generation of minutemen, armed not with muskets, but the ideas necessary to defend our individual freedom against the tyranny of our era. We can win, but only if we stand up and say "give us capitalism, and death to government control over our lives."
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
OUR SOCIALIST FUTURE by Mark Steyn, March 2009 edition. I feel that Obama is like a ethopian in a candy store, only America is the candy store. He will prove to be this countries worse mistake ever I think.
Quote:
George Bush famously admonished, " Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists." Evidently the Obama doctrine is: You're either with us ...or we'll fund you."The new administration will provide 900 million to Hamas-dominated Gaza-part of its new tone with the Islamic world ( Which Bush offended in the course of freeing 50 million from Muslim tyranny) End quote page 6 National Review 3-09
Now I voted for Bush ( never liked Cheney...cheshire cat smile gave me the willies) and Bush made some mistakes but he also kept us in good standing and held our ideals and our reputations high and in my opinion, with all his faults he tried to take the high way some times and that was a good thing, too bad he was such a schmuck publically. But Obama hell be the death of this great country and we just might follow in the steps of Germany and grow cold in the ashes of communistic reanimated dying ideals.
To the question of who will end our financial crisis....HUCKABY would have!
the economy is a farce. The government has played it's hand on holding an absolute icelock on the comings and goings of wealth. The people need very little from legacy wealth but the government plays an active role in keeping the people under the thumbs or the wealthiest. Here today, we're looking for a drastic reordering of this thumb. that's what's goin on. less for most more for some. that's the reorder. It was bush and their pesky tax relief that kindled this disturbance. Now the wealthy want to be 10 time more precaucious. it's like cocaine to them. why take an inch, take a yard.
two major issues are 1, we're at a technology glut. and 2 we have tech liberated work force. this means 2 things. less work, and less need. maybe this can mean more leisure and a cultural expansion? no. democrats can only measure progress by the amount of blood sweat and tears they can extract from their slave labour. it's their only perspective and view of life.
So much BS in 1 post!! McCain has lived off the gov tit all his life. Was even owned by the goverment!!
Pure capitalism as any ism is not good as it would lead to all the money owned by 1 person.
Greed is the fact many would sell their mother for a buck so business must have rules to survive as we all do. Our present crisis shows what not having good rules causes.
As for energy rules, we can keep doing, subsidizing oil, coal and go broke giving everything to OPEC, Russia, Venezuela, terrorists or chart a new way independent of overseas oil.
The easiest way is eliminate the oil, coal subsidies and put their other costs in them instead of my income taxes, health insurance, ect.
All gov is socialism and we need some of it. While Adam Smiths invisable hand can work, too many times the rich hold it back by any means possible so they steal all the money.
Obama has the right combo of ideas that will make for much better lives. Sadly they are similar that what McCain held just 8 yrs ago before he drank the koolaid of the radical business, religious right which lead us to where we are now, broke.
jerryd