“We have a confluence…here”

October 22, 2008 / 9:08 am • By Dr. Melissa Clouthier

Fausta Wertz says this about the 2008 presidential election milieu:

We have a confluence of factors here: corrupt, power-hungy politicians like Nancy Pelosi who will go to any lengths to consolidate their stranglehold on the country; Alinksy socialists like Obama who believe in redistributing wealth; people like Ayers who hate America and who want to end capitalism, and people who see Obama as a savior. Just yesterday I was in a podcast where one of the callers referred to Obama as fulfilling a Biblical prophecy: “a left-handed king who delivered the people after eight years” (they were possibly referring to Ehud, who was a judge, not a king?). And on top of all that, a media complicit in bringing them to power, even placing halos on Obama. All of them together can and will bring down democracy and free speech.

And interestingly, McCain is still close and may even win. In fact, I believe he will win–if he can overcome the voter fraud by the Democrats. What does that say about the American electorate?

The catalyst for the reflection: a Democrat laments the state of the Democratic Party and the media.

Posted in America • Political Animals
Tags: •

  • Matt Keyworth

    Folks, anyone who thinks Obama is a socialist has a lame grasp on what socialism is. This is clearly an effort to red bait the Democratic candidate, since most Americans don’t really understand the difference between socialism and communism and tend to conflate the two.

    ALL income tax schemes (including a flat tax) redistribute wealth, as the wealthy will always pay for more of the public good than the poor. It’s fine if you think this is unfair or somehow evil, but bear in mind that neither of the presidential candidates are suggesting an end to income tax.

    More to the point, unless McCain wants to completely overhaul the American tax system (which he hasn’t even hinted at), then he too favors this sort of wealth redistribution.

    If you want to debate the merits of one candidate’s tax scheme over the other, then let’s do that, but these attempts to scare the hell out of everyone by branding one candidate with an inflamatory ideological label undermine serious and productive debate on the matter and keep the nation divided.

  • Naqamel

    Folks, anyone who thinks Obama isn’t a socialist has a lame grasp on what socialism is.

    Fixed that for you.

    ALL income tax schemes (including a flat tax) redistribute wealth, as the wealthy will always pay for more of the public good than the poor.

    No, there are legitimate reasons to levy taxes against citizens, like National Defense. Somebody has to pay our brave soldiers. Taxing some citizens in order to give a check to other citizens who already do not pay income tax is simply a Marxist Wealth Redistribution Scheme. In other words, it’s socialism.

    It’s fine if you think this is unfair or somehow evil, but bear in mind that neither of the presidential candidates are suggesting an end to income tax.

    Which is too bad, and completely besides the point if we are discussing Obama’s socialism.

    More to the point, unless McCain wants to completely overhaul the American tax system (which he hasn’t even hinted at), then he too favors this sort of wealth redistribution.

    If you pay attention to the Dr.’s posts, she’s admitted as much.

    See, it’s a problem of scale. With McCain, we’ll get a little more socialism. With Obama, we’ll get a LOT more socialism in the form of fascism, and a LOT quicker.

    With McCain, at least we can hope that the Democratic Congress will be slow to work with him, stalling the socialism enough such that we can get Palin elected President in 2012.

    If you want to debate the merits of one candidate’s tax scheme over the other, then let’s do that, but these attempts to scare the hell out of everyone by branding one candidate with an inflamatory ideological label undermine serious and productive debate on the matter and keep the nation divided.

    It’s only inflammatory because it damages your boy Obama.

    If it weren’t true, the reaction would not have reminded people of the SS: Joe The Plumber asks a question, Obama admits he wants to spread the wealth, and suddenly – it’s Joe The Plumber that has to be destroyed.

    If it wasn’t socialism, the Mainstream Media would have said as much. Instead, the fact that they saw fit to smear (with a number of falsehoods) about Joe is damning.

    For example, I’ll bet that you knew, due to media coverage, that Joe is not a licensed plumber.

    I’ll bet that what you didn’t know is that in the State of Ohio, he doesn’t have to be licensed.

    Why? Because Joe has an apprentice license, and the man Joe works for DOES have a Plumber’s License.

    But that’s inconvenient for the media when trying to smear a guy who got their false messiah to admit he’s a socialist.

    By the way: Barack Obama shared an office with William Ayers for 3 years.

    Link – Obama and Ayers are BFF

    So much for “just a guy in his neighborhood”…

  • Mr. Chuckles

    Naq;

    Let’s put aside the election for a moment and look at the state of socialism that we are now in. Your boy Bush just pushed through the biggest corporate welfare package in history. How is this not socialism? It’s okay if it’s for corporations but not for people? If it’s profit then it’s private, but if it’s losses it’s public? I read that the $85 billion package for AIG was done because “they were too big to fail”, and that the financial fallout from their failure would affect everyone. I call B.S – divide all of the bailouts among all taxpaying citizens and you will get a nice little stimulus check to help the economy.

    We already have the “socialism” that you constantly rant about. Were you protesting Bush the last 8 years, or is your vitriol just for democrats? News flash: It’s still socialism when we bail out large corporations with tax dollars. I say let them fail. We will all be stronger on the other side for it.

    McCain won’t be any better than Obama – he’s not going to reform taxes in any meaningful way, and he is more likely to bailout big corporations with tax dollars (yes, this is still socialism). In the end, this may even cost us more (as it already has) than traditional handouts. Pick your poison – either way the tax dollars are going to get pissed away.

    P.S. – We bailed out Chrysler years ago using the same logic. Guess what we got for it – more crappy Chryslers and a company that still can’t stand on it’s own two feet. The $700 billion dollar package has $25 billion of pork in it for the big three. My little company is incorporated too, but guess what? If I fail I won’t be getting my little socialist welfare package. Same rules should apply. If you’re going to call foul on socialism, at least be consistent.

  • Glynn W.

    Ha Haaaa!

    Here’s the thing – Obama is not only going to win, but win big.

    The crazy thing is that you Palin Righties have only yourself to blame.

    Just a few short months ago, the Lefties (me) were seething at the Obama campaign. He had started making several Clintonian moves – trying to tack toward some imaginary “center”. You may recall how Obama promised to filibuster the FISA bill on the floor of the Senate – but then did no such thing.

    Now, I know you Righties enjoy having your privacy invaded, but us true Constitutionalists don’t. And we are the worker bees of the Democratic Party. The enthusiasm was gone, sucked dry. Daily Kos lit up with people afraid of repeating a Clinton-like rightwing term. The thrill was gone.

    Then you silly Nimrods went and nominated Palin. Barack made 10 million dollars THAT DAY. The thought of that incompetent being within John McCain’s heartbeat of the White House put the fear of God into us.

    We worked. We gave. We worked some more.

    And here we sit on the cusp of generational change.

    Thank you, you crazy, crazy ridiculous Righties! Thank you! Thank YOU!

  • Naqamel

    Please point out where I have defended Bush or McCain for their creeping socialism.

    The difference is, with Obama, it won’t be creeping – it’ll be full speed ahead to the United Socialist States of America, the USSA, with anyone who dared Question Dear Leader Obama getting the same kind of public rectal exam that Joe The Plumber got.

    Hey Glynn: Cubans once voted for “change”, too. So did Italians, and so did Germans.

    If I were you, I wouldn’t count my chickens before they hatched.

  • Glynn W.

    Naqamel,

    Chickens hatched and counted. BTW, how much does it cost to put lipstick on a pitbull?

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html

  • Naqamel

    Chickens hatched and counted.

    Really? It’s November 5th already?

    As far as the wardrobe… WHO CARES?

    Besides, What did Hillary Clinton spend on Pantsuits? Again – WHO CARES.

  • Mr. Chuckles

    Naq,

    So $785 billion in corporate welfare isn’t full throttle socialism? What would it take for you to admit to the biggest socialistic welfare splurge in history? 10 Trillion? 50?
    I smell hypocrisy here, big time. This bailout was no “creep” towards socialism, it was a full blown, fuel injected, turbo charged burnout. The execs at AIG that immediately went to their retreat are no better than the welfare recipients who buy crack and $2000 rims for their ’86 Hyundais ten minutes after getting thier checks. Just because the bailout doesn’t say “social program” on it doesn’t make it any more reprehensible. To paraphrase, “S**t by any other name smells just as bad”. Sorry my man, but it’s just as bad (actually worse) as any other “gummint” program.

  • Naqamel

    So $785 billion in corporate welfare isn’t full throttle socialism? What would it take for you to admit to the biggest socialistic welfare splurge in history? 10 Trillion? 50?

    And I posted on this very blog that I agreed with Michelle Malkin and that the bailout bill should be killed. In other words, I opposed it.

    I smell hypocrisy here, big time.

    If there is any, it’s coming from the Left.

  • Mr. Chuckles

    Naq,

    You missed my point, again…

    Your argument is that with Bush/McCain we are “creeping” towards socialism, and that with Obama it will be full speed ahead. I’m trying to point out that we’re already at full socialist throttle with the repubs in charge, so any accusations of increased socialism under Obama are ridiculous. Again, just because it doesn’t say “welfare’ on it doesn’t make it smell any better. You are against Obama because you claim he is a socialist, however we have a president who has been one all along. McCain will for the most part adopt 95% of what Bush has done. This makes him at least an equal in the socialist arena as Obama.

  • Headless Unicorn Guy

    Just yesterday I was in a podcast where one of the callers referred to Obama as fulfilling a Biblical prophecy: “a left-handed king who delivered the people after eight years” (they were possibly referring to Ehud, who was a judge, not a king?).

    Actually, The One and his handlers are working the playbook of a different Biblical prophecy — the Pre-Mil interpretation of Revelation. Seven years of dystopia under The Antichrist (“except those days be shortened, none will survive”) then Christ returns to destroy Antichrist and all his works and all who bear his mark, after which Christ sets up the Heavenly Kingdom on Earth for the Millenium.

    Since Indecision 2000, Bush has been cast as The Antichrist. Now Obama (and/or his handlers) has cast himself as the Coming Christ figure in this little mystery play.

  • Naqamel

    Obama would definitely be worse than McCain.

    Obama would likely sign the revived “Fairness Doctrine”, an assault on the 1st Amendment.

    Obama also supports gun control laws, an assault on the 2nd Amendment.

    Obama’s foreign policy has disaster written all over it, too.