Red Herring
This fallacy is often known by the Latin name "Ignoratio Elenchi", which translates as "ignorance of refutation". The ignorance involved is either ignorance of the conclusion to be refuted—even deliberately ignoring it—or ignorance of what constitutes a refutation, so that the attempt misses the mark.
"En archei aiteisthai"...the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises.
You say the message is not the problem...As I said, the message was not the problem... and you only have a problem with the messenger...but the messenger is made of straw.
All I'm asking is if you would believe another messenger since your only problem seems to be with Keyes discussing the issue instead of Rush.
Let's go back to my very first words of the post to which you replied...
The message is right.What am I missing that makes such a simple statement unclear? I'm not trying to be difficult, but I don't see that the messenger matters regarding the message. It's just that Alan Keyes was an interesting messenger for such a message.
Of course, we could get into subtleties of the term "socialistic" or "socialism." Harvard historian Gaetano Salvemini pointed out that even with government interventionism of FDR, America wasn't "fascist" at the time (because we retained personal freedoms), but in describing the economics of Fascist Italy, he noted:
"In actual fact, it is the State, i.e. the taxpayer, who has become responsible to private enterprise. In Fascist Italy the State pays for the blunders of private enterprise. As long as business was good, profit remained to private initiative. When the depression came, the Government added the loss to the tax-payer's burden. Profit is private and individual. Loss is public and social."That seems to me to be a pretty good description of what we see in America today. Wouldn't you agree?
--Under the Axe of Fascism, by Gaetano Salvemini
So I would say that this bailout idea might be "socialistic," but would use that term as an adjective along with others. And I would also say that such a socialistic element can exist in many systems (even Fascist Italy)--so even if someone could argue that we are not fully Socialist economy, that doesn't mean this is not "socialistic."