The President Must Realize The "Socialist" Questions Are Fair

In "Star Trek II-The Wrath of Kahn" when the Reliant didn't respond Spock said, "There are two possibilities. They are unable to respond; they are unwilling to respond." Is Obama a Socialist or not? Obama already answered that to Joe the Plumber ("spreading the wealth"), things he's said, written, and his associations (e.g. Frank Marshall Davis, the "poet" in "Dreams of my Father", a Communist Party USA member, etc.), plus his voting record. Since the economy's still on it's way down after 50 days in office, the real question is, "Is Obama deliberately tanking the stock market for the purposes of terraforming the economy to intentionally change our country into a Socialist nation, or is he simply incompetent?" Restated: "He is unable to respond; he is unwilling to respond." Obama said he's not a Socialist, but the "Communist Manifesto" and "The Prince" by Machiavelli (and "The Koran" for that matter) all expound the so-called "virtues" of lying as "the ends justifies the means". So a polygraph is unreliable, if he's a true believer in Socialism. He says it started on Bush's watch, but Bush wasn't exactly a capital 'C' Conservative, and blame shifting doesn't excuse the continued implementation of Socialist principles. Communism is 1 step away from Socialism, when combined with coercive control such as "The Fairness Doctrine" (death faked by Dick Durbin with an amendment regulating station ownership and staffing instead) and chipping everything and everybody with RFID.

'The president is a socialist'. I'm assuming this is the GOP's new version of crying wolf? They'll need to be careful. Sooner or later, people might stop coming.

If the president a solicalist, I come from one 90 miles south of key west. Whent the goverment, control the money, the banks,teh market, health benefit, taxes,unployment benefits,charities,how much you can earn, I you make more you will pay for the one who pay less, they own your home, your childen education, control salaries, control benefits so on so far. If this sound familiar. Yes he is. Ask castro, ask venezuela, as bolivia, ask Peru, ask Panama, ask Mexico, ask any one that came from those place. They will tell you. American wake up!!!! we been had

Not a socialist, lets go back, Bush 2dn term was dominated by the democrat congress. They pass legislation and if rememver , he even try to veto a few of them. Now he said is not in his wach, lets ee buch expend half the terf money, then consult with him on using the second half once he wads the president elect, then he expend 1 trilion dollar during he wach, and the market keep going down, he talk or any of his staff talk the market go down 400 point, at least we buch did talk market barely go down 200 to 300 hundred points. Is easier to blame a non funtioning program to the preivious wach, than take responsavility for his. Mr. President, THIS IS YOUR WATCH, NOW and for the next 3 and half years. bETTER PRACTICES A LOT, YOU HAVE 3 YEARS TO BAME ALL YOUR ERROSRS IN JUDGEMENT TO THE LAST ADMINISTARTION, IT WOULD NOT FLY AGAIN.

Bush was a socialist, Obama is an even bigger one. Obama's defense in saying that it wasn't under his watch that we've had socialist actions by the gov't, in order to paint himself as a non-socialist doesn't work. The previous administration's actions were socialist and Obama's are as well. Bush was NOT a small government guy, but we know that Obama is a HUGE gov't guy. Socialism breeds more socialism because it fails and then the politicians step in saying that we need more socialism to fix the problems that socialism created!

I don't want to know who called that President a socialist; I want to know who called that socialist a President!

For all of the "Bush Haters", Congress passes legislation, and if I recall that was a very "Democrat" congress that passed all of this so-called spending. And if Obama insists that his budget is what he inherited, than let's get the last president to Washington to sign it.

There's a big difference between taking the public's skepticism lightly, and giving credibility to an exaggerated and absurd line of attack. Let's face it... the socialism talk is a scare tactic. Conservatives are using it to try to scare republicans and moderates into believing that any attempt by Obama to use government intervention to correct our failing economy is part of a dark socialist agenda. It's shameless and immature, and it does nothing to help our current situation. Now if republicans could come up with some actual ideas (besides tax cuts) to fix this mess they created, instead of propagating the socialism nonsense, that would be nice.

And by what line of reasoning do you say he is not a socialist? Redistribution of income is certainly the main tenant of a socialist government,.

If it smells like socialism and looks like socialism, then it must be socialism. His policies do not pass the "stress test" of capitalism and free marketing and will only take the country down the socialist path further.

Perhaps Mr. Obama doesn't realize the meaning of "Socialist". He views the governement as a total golden pot at the end of the rainbow and there is a never ending supply of gold, silver or money. So, he can spend as much as he wants and it makes no difference. In his eyes, the enemy is the military, anyone who says he cannot have one of his programs, anyone who doesn't want to simply hand him the power of a Czar. (he seems to be taking lessons from Hugo!) His belief is "People for the Government to serve as indentured servants"; not "Government FOR the People; by the people". Reagan had it right. "Government is NOT the solution to the problem; government IS the problem!!" What is this clown thinking?

All's fair in the asking but implying that the person asking has any clue in hell what he's talking about such as Sullivan's "socialist" questions is just funny. What Bush did to the capitalist market image of honor should've got him tried for treason. To restore "confidence" in the ponzi scheme of wall street is a waste of time. Try and convict every CEO of any finacial institution that has "failed" and a few of us might do something besides buy E bonds

I found this and thought I would share: A profound short little paragraph..... "You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it." ~~~~~ Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931

Only thing worse than a socialist is a humanist ! I have sorted this all out - racism ? genderism ? ALL trickle down from humanism. Once you say you're top species ? And Einstein likes to say- of COURRRRSE humans would say they are #1 ? You lock yourself out of abstracting your identity from other life forms as peers. After that ? Maybe humanity serves the company it keeps ?

To say that Obama is not a socialist; he is merely doing what he feels is best, is unfair to socialists and those who ask the question. Swedish socialists and many others are doing what they feel is best. Socialism is not be nature going against what you feel is best for people. Socialism is about more government control of industry and production, and the question is not (on its own) a question about Obama's integrity. It is a question about his policies, and the policies he has shown so far clearly point toward socialism. The proposed national insurance plan may go far beyond the French system which provides a certain amount for procedures and allows providers to charge more at the choice of the consumer. My understanding is that the US national insurance program will establish a price for procedures and that providers charging more than those fees will not have their services covered at all under the insurance plan. This is government price control, and it will result in 4 month waits for basic services that we now get in 2-3 weeks. We already have a healthcare shortage. Let's not provide those providers we have with incentive to retire or change careers.

You can call it what you want but when you take my tax dollars from Missouri and send it to California for their own irresponsible spending without me having a say in it is wrong! Taking money from someone and giving it to someone else without their consent is wrong and also the first stages of 'Socialism' whether you want to believe it or not. BO keeps blaming his spending on the administration before him, I have a question for him to answer. "Who has had control of Washington since January 4th, 2007?"

Obama didn't answer the question, he deflected it. It is a yes or no question. Are you a socialist yes or no? The way he worded the answer it makes him sound like a socialist. Are you a socialist? [Sure,] but it wasn't under my watch that we started buying up shares of the banks [so why are you asking me this question].

President Obama is not a Socialist. yeah right, have you been living in a cave? How can you be so sure?

Thanks Brian for your insite. If you go back and see who is mentors were; HE IS A SOCIALIST. OBAMA also needs a script to talk to the American people or just anyone infront of him, even is its just 15 to twenty people. That's our great orator in chief. He cannot seem to stay focused, he's all over the place-one step at a time-throws out something new every day keep the confusion going. Stay home and take care of business. How much does it cost us for his constant flying aroung, and he takes more people on the plan than he's going to talk to. In Ohio yes some new police officers will have a job for a year, then what? I don't think he has a clue. He alreay won the election act like a President. He is spending like a drunken sailor. With all the money in all those so called stimulus and bailout bills each household in America could have received $79,000.00,that I think we could have spent better than the Government. Thanks for all the great work you do every day keeping us informed on what is happening out there.

I agree, Obama is not a Socialist but he HAS put forth massive spending on social programs through the most recent Stimulus bill that will create few jobs. Were these programs needed? Probably. Are they helping millions of Americans who need it? Probably. But I agree with this story in that it is an insult to Americans when you claim the whole bill will create jobs and stimulate the economy. The answer just isn't that simple and neither should President Obama's response to criticism over these facts, either. I supported this President last election, and he still has my faith. I just don't like being deceived by anyone.

obama not a socialist?? Who are you the writer trying to kid in your last paragraph.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because the past administration did it doesn't mean he should do it as well. He is just want to make sure he is not letting this crisis to go to waste. Government officials are suppose to be good stewards of taxpayers money, I guess its OK to waste money just because Bush did it. Didn't democrats criticized Bush for wasteful spending? What do you call the spending bill?

All of this talk of socialism would have been devastating for a president 60 years ago. But take a look at his favorability ratings and you can see that the same is not true today. It is because people have finally realized that unregulated free markets are not good for this or any other country. Corporations are all about self preservation and do not give a hoot about anything except building shareholder "value". And that is not going to ensure that anyone can afford health care, retirement with dignity, or quality education, especially when building shareholder value means taking operations to countries with the lowest paid workers.

"President Obama is not a Socialist. He is merely doing what he feels is best for the country and those who voted for him." Is the second sentence supposed to make me believe that the first sentence is negated? Is that your best argument to convince me that Obama is not putting Socialist policies in place? Lets call a spade a spade here. Wikipedia: "Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating public or state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equality for all individuals, with a fair or egalitarian method of compensation." Taking money from the rich (regardless of how they got it) and using it to "equalize" the economy by giving it to the unfortunate through government channels MATCHES the definition above, perfectly. We've heard a lot of talk from Obama about nationalizing the auto industry, the banking system and now healthcare. If that isn't Socialism, what is?

I'm not so sure Obama isn't a socialist. He sure favors a lot socialist programs/ideals to still be a capitalist. He blames big business an awful lot to still be a capitalist as well. (Disclaimer, some big business deserves the blame, but big, intrusive government and programs supported by Obama deserve at least as much.) Unemployment benifits are a socialist policy, social security is a socialist policy, public health care is a socialist policy, national banks are a socialist idea. Many democrats seem to laugh off the accusation that something is socialist under the presumption that such a claim is absurd and can only be meant as an insult. As such, I am encouraged that Obama had the balls to at least answer this question, even though he did a typical political misdirection/non-answer. Maybe we can at least have the conversation as to weather we want to become an increasingly socialist society instead of just doing it anyway, while we laugh at the possibility of becoming more socialist. And if we can have the conversation, I'm more confident we won't become socialist than if we didn't even have the conversation.... Notice I just said more confident, not that I am confident....