Obama Wars
See other Obama Wars Articles
Title: 55 Percent of Likely Voters Find ‘Socialist’ an Accurate Label of Obama?
Source:
NRO
URL Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/campa ... socialist-accurate-label-obama
Published: Jul 9, 2010
Author: Jim Geraghty
Post Date: 2010-07-09 10:41:30 by Badeye
Keywords: None
Views: 61493
Comments: 80
55 Percent of Likely Voters Find ‘Socialist’ an Accurate Label of Obama? July 09, 2010 9:13 AM By Jim Geraghty The latest poll by Democracy Corps, the firm of James Carville and Stan Greenberg, has Republicans leading on the generic ballot among likely voters, 48 percent to 42 percent. Deep in the poll, they ask, “Now, I am going to read you a list of words and phrases which people use to describe political figures. For each word or phrase, please tell me whether it describes Barack Obama very well, well, not too well, or not well at all.” On “too liberal,” 35 percent of likely voters say it describes Obama “very well,” 21 percent say “well,” 21 percent say “not too well,” and 17 percent say “not well at all.” In other words, 56 percent of likely voters consider Obama too liberal. When asked about “a socialist,” 33 percent of likely voters say it describes Obama “very well,” 22 percent say “well,” 15 percent say “not too well,” and 25 percent say “not well at all.” In other words, 55 percent of likely voters think “socialist” is a reasonably accurate way of describing Obama.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-10) not displayed.
.
.
.
#11. To: go65 (#6)
Take it up with Carville and Greenberg, well known 'neo cons' (laughing)
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
So maybe you might address the topic, rather than try to obscure it with references to the minority party that didn't produce the poll.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
"Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality" "The accuracy of your tag line is affirmed daily." Even though I'm not a republican, I would still rather choose my own reality than have some commie pig choose it for me, that's what makes freedom and individualizm so great! jmo!
what's there to take up? They conducted a poll that shows that people are buying into Republican idiocy. Congrats.
Socialism has become a buzzword in politics lately, a word that has been thrown about by people whose political knowledge goes no further than reading Fox News headlines on their phones. Tea Partiers in particularly are especially guilty of dropping the ’s-bomb’, especially when used to describe Pres. Obama. Of course, socialists themselves beg to differ. In an interview, Frank Llewellyn, the director of the DSA, and Billy Wharton, co-chair of the Socialist Party USA, both strongly refute the popular idea that Obama is a socialist. “We didn’t see a great victory with the election of Barack Obama,” Wharton says, ” and we certainly didn’t see our agenda move from the streets to the White House.” Llewellyn also claims that the socialist label definitely didn’t fit Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. “To be honest, the most socialist candidate in the 2008 election was Sarah Palin.” When she was governor of Alaska, Palin was vocally proud of the fact that her state slapped a windfall profits tax on oil companies operating on Alaskan soil and distributed the revenue directly to Alaskans themselves. This, says Llewellyn, is a thoroughly-socialist act, because it uses redistributive actions to reduce inequality in society. Palin once attempted to defend her actions, stating that it was not socialism because the people of Alaska owned the resources that the oil companies were extracting. Of course, no one bothered to point out to Mrs. Palin that her defense constitutes a textbook argument for socialism. One of the tenets of Marxism is that natural resources belong to the people of the state not the state or a state created entity.
Maybe she should team up with Hugo Chavez for her 2012 run.
"The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there. It's natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is." - Rush Limbaugh
Take it up with Carville and Greenberg, well known 'neo cons' (laughing) what's there to take up? They conducted a poll that shows that people are buying into Republican idiocy. Really? Can you provide something to support this claim?
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
Wow! Who knew that NEWSWEEK was a republican house organ?
#12. To: lucysmom (#7)
#13. To: lucysmom, go65 (#8)
#14. To: Badeye (#11)
Take it up with Carville and Greenberg, well known 'neo cons' (laughing)
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#15. To: lucysmom, war, murron, badeye, skip intro, ignore amos, fred mertz, brian s (#7)
In a statement that surprises absolutely no one who has any kind of grasp at all of what socialism actually means, the director of the Democratic Socialists of America stated that Obama, contrary to popular belief, is not a socialist – and that Sarah Palin is far more representative of his organization’s beliefs.
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#16. To: go65 (#15)
... because the people of Alaska owned the resources that the oil companies were extracting.
#17. To: go65 (#15)
Palin once attempted to defend her actions, stating that it was not socialism because the people of Alaska owned the resources that the oil companies were extracting.
#18. To: go65 (#14)
#19. To: go65 (#14)
people are buying into Republican idiocy.
If I could, I would.
But I can't, so I won't.
#20. To: Ignore Amos (#19)
(laughing) He's flailing around a lot these days...kinda a mirror image of the Democratic Party, in a full scale panic.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#21. To: Badeye (#18)
The results of the poll you posted showed that respondents are buying the line of crap from the GOP that Obama is a socialist. Meanwhile, those who actually know what a socialist is, say he isn't and instead point to Palin as being one of them.
Can you provide something to support this claim?
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#22. To: go65 (#21) (Edited)
Can you provide something to support this claim that Republicans are making this assertion in such an overwhelming array of interviews, columns, media ads? No, you can't. Owe-bama's being judged on his actions as POTUS. And the average American isn't just 'underwhelmed' they are frightened. And they know socialism when they see it. This isn't the GOP's doing. You can't support the statement. Its Owe-bama's.
The results of the poll you posted showed that respondents are buying the line of crap from the GOP that Obama is a socialist.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#23. To: Badeye, lucysmom, sneakypete, war, skip intro, fred mertz, brian s, (#22)
I think we've discovered Fred Flintstone folks. Nobody else can live under a rock that big.
Can you provide something to support this claim that Republicans are making this assertion in such an overwhelming array of interviews, columns, media ads?
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#24. To: go65 (#23)
Back up your assertion, or shut up. Bluff called.
Can you provide something to support this claim that Republicans are making this assertion in such an overwhelming array of interviews, columns, media ads?
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#25. To: go65 (#23)
Patrick, Sponge Bob's friend, lives under a rock.
#26. To: Badeye (#24)
I'll shut up, beats banging my head against a rock.
Back up your assertion, or shut up.
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#27. To: war (#25)
Badeye is Patrick? That makes a lot of sense. Patrick, Sponge Bob's friend, lives under a rock.
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#28. To: go65 (#23)
Can you provide something to support this claim that Republicans are making this assertion in such an overwhelming array of interviews, columns, media ads? What passes for Republicans today can NOT afford to start throwing the word "socialist" around because they know it would stick to them as well as the Dims. I think we've discovered Fred Flintstone folks. Nope. If you had you would be proclaiming him as a endangered minority,and creating special government programs to help him.
"I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago." (Sarah Palin,Dec 2009) ************************************ DID Palin say or write these things or not? (Me) I don't know or F ing care. (Mad Dog posted on 2009-12-26 16:36:33 ET,post # 105 http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=5510&Disp=114#C114)
#29. To: sneakypete (#28)
Okay...that right there is funny...
Nope. If you had you would be proclaiming him as a endangered minority,and creating special government programs to help him.
#30. To: go65 (#26)
Appreciate the choice to shut up. thank you.
Back up your assertion, or shut up.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#31. To: sneakypete (#28)
Okay...that made me laugh.
Nope. If you had you would be proclaiming him as a endangered minority,and creating special government programs to help him.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#32. To: go65 (#27)
Back to personal attacks..and getting them from the now discredited dwarf? Damn shame. Telling..but still a damn shame.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#33. To: go65 (#21)
On the other hand, socialist (according to the GOP spin machine) California, the the third largest oil producing state, has no severance tax on oil and issues no wealth redistributing checks to its residents.
Meanwhile, those who actually know what a socialist is, say he isn't and instead point to Palin as being one of them.
#34. To: lucysmom (#33)
Yeah, its issuing IOU's instead....(laughing)
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#35. To: lucysmom (#33)
The people of Alaska get dividend checks from oil revenue because those resources are legally owned by the citizens of the State, not because of some socialist program.
has no severance tax on oil and issues no wealth redistributing checks to its residents.
#36. To: no gnu taxes (#35)
Yes, as has already been stated, that is precisely a Socialist position.
The people of Alaska get dividend checks from oil revenue because those resources are legally owned by the citizens of the State, not because of some socialist program.
#37. To: no gnu taxes, badeye (#35)
Republicans in the state legislature have all signed a pledge, "no gnu taxes". It takes a 2/3 majority vote to pass a budget in California and that's why the budget is perpetually late, not balanced, and state workers are issued IOUs.
no gnu taxes
#38. To: lucysmom (#36)
No, the socialist position would be for the State to keep the money and set up government programs complete with all the accompanying bureacracy for the "good" of the people. Returning the dividends to the people for them to spend as they see fit is a quintessential anti-socialist course of action. It's the people's money.
#39. To: no gnu taxes (#35)
Section 8.11 - Mineral Rights. Discovery and appropriation shall be the basis for establishing a right in those minerals reserved to the State which, upon the date of ratification of this constitution by the people of Alaska, were subject to location under the federal mining laws. Prior discovery, location, and filing, as prescribed by law, shall establish a prior right to these minerals and also a prior right to permits, leases, and transferable licenses for their extraction. Continuation of these rights shall depend upon the performance of annual labor, or the payment of fees, rents, or royalties, or upon other requirements as may be prescribed by law. Surface uses of land by a mineral claimant shall be limited to those necessary for the extraction or basic processing of the mineral deposits, or for both. Discovery and appropriation shall initiate a right, subject to further requirements of law, to patent of mineral lands if authorized by the State and not prohibited by Congress. The provisions of this section shall apply to all other minerals reserved to the State which by law are declared subject to appropriation. Section 8.12 - Mineral Leases and Permits. The legislature shall provide for the issuance, types and terms of leases for coal, oil, gas, oil shale, sodium, phosphate, potash, sulfur, pumice, and other minerals as may be prescribed by law. Leases and permits giving the exclusive right of exploration for these minerals for specific periods and areas, subject to reasonable concurrent exploration as to different classes of minerals, may be authorized by law. Like leases and permits giving the exclusive right of prospecting by geophysical, geochemical, and similar methods for all minerals may also be authorized by law.
#40. To: no gnu taxes (#38)
Ypu are, my friend, a good Socialist!
Returning the dividends to the people for them to spend as they see fit is a quintessential anti-socialist course of action. It's the people's money.
#41. To: no gnu taxes (#38) (Edited)
Nope. The Socialist model is exactly this. The State would claim that the ownership of the resources is in the people and would determine what share of the profits gleaned from the development of those minerals the people would be entitlted to. The oil companies extract according to their abilities and the society benefits according to its needs. It does not get any more Marxist than that. Returning the dividends to the people for them to spend as they see fit...It's the people's money. WOW...what a GOOD little Marxist you are.
#42. To: lucysmom, no gnu taxes, badeye (#37)
Republicans in the state legislature have all signed a pledge, "no gnu taxes". It takes a 2/3 majority vote to pass a budget in California and that's why the budget is perpetually late, not balanced, and state workers are issued IOUs. State governments have basically three options - raise taxes, cut spending, or a combination of both. (In addition to these, the fedgov has four - the forth being to print money) Question: In your world, is cutting spending EVER justified? Or would you be in favor of just cutting out the middleman by having ALL wealth go to the state, and the state doling out a pittance to us?
no gnu taxes
If I could, I would.
But I can't, so I won't.
#43. To: Ignore Amos (#42)
Where would you cut spending? Or would you be in favor of just cutting out the middleman by having ALL wealth go to the state, and the state doling out a pittance to us? Check out what prop 13 did for commercial property taxes Goldberg calculates that Disneyland, which hasn't had a reportable change of ownership since, well, forever, is currently taxed at an average of about a nickel per square foot. For comparison, a median California home bought last year out of foreclosure, measuring 1,600 square feet and selling for about $330,000 (these are averages from the California Assn. of Realtors), would incur property tax of about $3,300 per year, or $2.06 per square foot. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jul/13/business/fi-hiltzik13
Question: In your world, is cutting spending EVER justified?
#44. To: war (#41)
There is no "need" qualification for the issuance of the dividends.
#45. To: no gnu taxes (#44)
The need to survive is predicated upon money.
There is no "need" qualification for the issuance of the dividends.
#46. To: war (#41)
And the money distributed to citizens of the State comes solely from the sale of the States natural resources, which the citizens own. It is nothing more than dividends on stock performance.
#47. To: no gnu taxes (#46)
Thanks, Karl, got it the first time.
And the money distributed to citizens of the State comes solely from the sale of the States natural resources, which the citizens own.
#48. To: lucysmom (#43)
That would be a 'no' huh? (laughing)
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#49. To: lucysmom (#43) (Edited)
There are no easy answers, of course. I work for an organization (not a gov't entity) and, without getting too specific - it has been faced with some tough choices due to the crappy economy. We found out - just recently - that every staff employee will be getting between a 5 and 8 percent pay cut. Tough choices, indeed. But the way I look at it - it beats layoffs (which so far they have not had to do.) So - cutting personnel costs is always an option - albeit not an easy one. And aren't these people (legislators) elected to make tough choices. Can it not be fixed?
Where would you cut spending?
Check out what prop 13 did for commercial property taxes
Not being a Californian, I only have a vague idea of what Prop. 13 is/was. What you posted certainly points out a problem. No law is ever perfect, however. Unintended consequences always occur.
If I could, I would.
But I can't, so I won't.
#50. To: Badeye (#48)
I'm thinking the "no gnu tax" guys should take a pay cut.
That would be a 'no' huh? (laughing)
#51. To: lucysmom (#50)
What would expect to accomplish by taxing gnus? I'm thinking the "no gnu tax" guys should take a pay cut.
.
.
.
Comments (52 - 80) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]