Obama's Socialism

The American Thinker ^ | February 25, 2010 | Adam Shaw

[Scanian]

Recently on "The O'Reilly Factor," Bill O'Reilly seemed very concerned about President Obama being described as a socialist by members of the right such as Rush Limbaugh. O'Reilly has often dodged calling the president a socialist, as if doing so would condemn Obama as a tyrannical dictator. It was discussed throughout the show with various guests, and O'Reilly frequently stated that yes, Obama is a far-left guy, but he didn't want to use the actual term "socialist." It would be too much.

Here in Britain we look at the continuing battle as to whether Obama is a socialist or not as a rather odd American quibble. In Britain we have no problem defining people as socialists, nor do people on the left have a problem calling themselves socialists. It is not that those of us on the conservative right do not believe that socialism is a bad doctrine. We do, and we see evidence of its continual destruction of the country on a day-to-day basis, but we have always had socialism living quite openly amongst us. We are therefore able to see and recognize it quite calmly as a day-to-day occurrence in politics, just as one recognizes the flu. We wish it didn't exist, but it does, and so we get on with our lives, trying to avoid catching it in the process.

When one looks back at the prime ministers that the British Labour Party has produced in the twentieth century -- James Ramsay MacDonald, Clement Attlee, Harold Wilson, James Callaghan etc. -- all have defined themselves as socialists at one time or another. Even the relatively centrist Tony Blair described himself as "Coming to Socialism through Marxism" and is a member of the Christian Socialist Movement.

[Scanian]

You are absolutely right. Zer0 agreed to go on O’Reilly’s show during the campaign, which evidently got Billy good ratings that night, and he has been sucking up to Zer0 ever since.

Billy is clearly dying to get another interview with him, as if the viewing public hasn’t seen Elephant Ears enough already. Having him on in 2008 was much different than having him on in 2010, now that we’ve all had a bellyfull of him.

[Matchett-PI]

"O’Reilly is an idiot. He really is. Blowhard and idiot. He almost makes me cringe sometimes when he’s talking to somebody with real brains such as Brit Hume, Charles Krauthammer or Karl Rove. He doesn’t have the command of facts and detail he needs to be discussing about half of what he talks about.."

Exactly. But then neither do the biggest portion of his viewers so he gets away with it.

He is also very petty and vindictive as a result of his extremely thin skin. Here's merely one, out of many instances, that can be cited:

"As I recall what brought Bill O'Reilly to say that someone should kill Matt Drudge shows exactly how petty Mr. O'Reilly can be.

"Drudge had posted the news that O'Reilly was starting a radio show and it was believed that O'Reilly thought that he could take on and defeat Rush.

"O'Reilly denied that he was starting a radio show.

"Drudge persisted even stating that O'Reilly was paying stations to take his show.

"For days O'REilly had some pretty nasty (hateful?) things to say about Drudge -- then there was that Imus show statement that someone should kill Matt Drudge. O'Reilly's emphasis.

"Shortly after that he started his radio show."

288 posted on 08/01/2007 10:13:46 PM EDT by WilliamofCarmichael

[Scanian]

Can you imagine how Hill must talk about O’Reilly when he is around the rest of his commie crowd?

Billy is letting himself be used as a tool. Maybe at his income level you don’t care about such things but to me it is a sickening embarassment.

[CIB-173RDABN]

He's so full of himself that his smugness has become nauseating.

---

Whenever a bit on pop culture comes up he either pretends he does not know the reference or really does not know the reference. I am not sure which it is, but either way, it distances himself from his audience.

I watch The Factor because of Bill but in spite of him. They do have some great guest and I really love the Miller Time.

[Scanian]

I realize I am an extreme paranoid but I believe in my heart that when he took office Zer0 had every intention of socializing the country by hook or by crook and make himself a Chavez-style quasi-dictator. It was only public outrage that forced him to cool his jets a bit. This time last year we were talking about brown shirts and Americorps being used as an American SA based on remarks by Rahm Emanuel. Nowadays, we don’t hear much about such Obot programs being developed. The tea parties and town halls made any such ideas like seem politically impracticable.

[ETL]

And think about all the important things he COULD be doing, such as linking MLH’s “Black Liberation” revolutionary communism to Obama and Reverend Wright’s. Even Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground advocated “Black Liberation”. Of course they didn’t do it through some concocted phony ‘religion’ like “Black Liberation Theology” like Rev Wright and Screwy Louie Farrakhan does. The so-called “Nation of Islam” is another Black Liberation Theology revolutionary communist front movement. Farrakhan’s great vision is to establish a Maoist system here in the U.S. with various “ministries” controlling specific areas of our lives, much like what Obama is attempting to do with all of his “Czars”. Much more on all this on my FR Home page.

[Matchett-PI]

O’Reilly made a jackass out of himself again this morning:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/02/oreilly-for-president-i-mave-more-power-doing-what-im-doing.html

[ETL]

Thanks. I’ll check it out.

[Tolik]

Adam Shaw:

... There are as many exact definitions of socialism as there are socialists. Yet they do have 
common characteristics. Love of big government, nationalization of industry, massive 
taxation, wealth redistribution, etc. all point towards socialism. Someone like the president 
would not even have to say he was a socialist in Western Europe; it would be assumed quite 
normally, without any fuss or conspiracy.

I have a lot of respect for Bill O'Reilly, but to a Brit who has seen his fair share of socialists and 
lives in a socialist country run by a self-described socialist party by a self-described socialist 
prime minister who has taken over for another self-described socialist prime minister, it is 
puzzling why self-described independents like Mr O'Reilly are doing backflips in an attempt 
to avoid the obvious fact -- President Obama is quite clearly a socialist.

All these verbal gymnastics that are used to avoid stating the obvious may be rather humorous for 
someone watching from over the Atlantic, but for Americans, such delusion is a very serious matter. 
It is important, not just for the American right, but for the American people as a whole, to realise just 
exactly who it is they have elected to office. With the approval numbers dropping almost daily for 
the president, it appears that it is sinking in for the generally center-right American public.  

However, when people on the right start being "concerned" about describing Obama as what he clearly 
is, in part due to the hysteria that both sides of the political spectrum exhibit when the word "socialist" 
is used, then it damages the effectiveness of opposition to him. Instead of being able to define what 
Obama's aims are in his presidency, those on the left and on the right keep pushing Obama into a slightly 
left-of-center, non-ideological fog. Such a political move is deceitful, and it does not allow the American 
public to get a clear perception of just what they have voted into the White House.

Those of us across the pond who analyze American politics know exactly who it is you have in the White 
House. Obama is not some new post-political entity. Nor is he some form of Stalinist that will set up a 
USSA. He is a normal, well-spoken, charismatic socialist who in Britain would sit quite happily towards 
the left of the Labour Party alongside figures such as Tony Benn, Aneurin Bevan, Harold Wilson, and Ed 
Balls. To call someone a socialist is not conspiratorial, and it is not fear-mongering; it is simply the truth, and 
it is time for some in the conservative media to take a deep breath and admit it -- America has a socialist 
leading the country. 

Welcome to the club: It stinks!

Nailed It!

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.)

I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention.

You are welcome to browse the list of truly exceptional articles I pinged to lately. Updated on January 13, 2010.  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about).

Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

 

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Drudge would sometimes playback O'Reilly's "someone should kill Matt Drudge" comments as a lead-in to his (Drudge's) Sunday night live radio show. WLW's (Cincinnati) Bill Cunningham now does the show.

I do not have a TV and have never seen O'Reilly's show. I used to listen to his radio show but I stopped listening when O'Reilly trashed Viet Nam war veterans opposing Kerry to curry favor with Kerry -- O'Reilly wanted Kerry on his TV/radio shows and, post election, stated that he and Kerry were friends.

No spin? My gosh O'Reilly's a whirling dervish!

[Matchett-PI]

Anyone who cares too much about what others think of him can never be trusted until he grows up and becomes emotionally stable.

That's my biggest problem with O'Reilly. He is waaaaaaaaaay too thin-skinned, has a hard time accepting any criticism, and as a result is very defensive, petty and vindictive.

[spodefly]

BTTT

[GOPJ]

tolik - you’re missed. When are you coming back?