The forum discussion centers on the debate surrounding whether Barack Obama is a socialist or a capitalist. Participants highlight the irony of individuals who benefit from social programs labeling Obama as a socialist while simultaneously opposing socialism. The conversation also touches on the political spectrum, noting that Obama is considered extremely liberal compared to the majority of the U.S. population, and emphasizes the distinction between "liberal" and "socialist." The discussion concludes with reflections on the political climate and the challenges Obama faces in implementing reforms.
PREREQUISITESThis discussion is beneficial for political analysts, students of political science, and anyone interested in understanding the complexities of American political ideologies and the implications of social programs on public perception.
I didn't say they were synonomous, but they certainly are on the same side of the spectrum.GeorginaS said:One more edit: "liberal" is not a synonym for "socialist"
Obama has a filibuster-proof majority (for another year, anyway) and W never did. If Obama can't get the legislation he wants passed with a filibuster proof majority, it 'ain't the GOP's fault: Obama has a serious leadership problem with his own party!turbo-1 said:The truth is that without some cooperation from Congress, he cannot fix ANY problem that requires legislative action, and the GOP in Congress is in lock-step trying to stop any initiatives that he might favor, in order to hand him losses. The GOP pretty much had free rein during W's administration, and they could have reformed banking, monetary policy, health-care, etc, and chose not to do any of that.
Please. With a filibuster proof majority, what reason does the democratic majority have for listening to the GOP? All politicians like to talk about bi-partisanship, but none really mean it. And when the party in power can't get what they want passed, they "throw a tantrum" and whine about lack of cooperation from the other party.Now that hard choices have to be made, instead of coming up with new ideas, negotiations, and compromise, they throw tantrums instead of cooperating and crafting legislation.
Me? That's you creating the false dichotomy, Ivan. You putting words in peoples' mouths, claiming there are people (none here...) labeling Obama a socialist. You're creating a strawman.Ivan Seeking said:No, and no. You see, Russ, you are trying to put everyone into little boxes again.
Since you consider yourself to be in the center, that is unsurprising.He has been President for a year, and I see someone who has governed from the middle.
...then why are you creating them, Ivan?Try understanding the point before passing judgment. Little boxes, Russ, little boxes - they don't exist.
No, I'm not familiar with any particular claim. Perhaps you could cite your claim, then we can analyze the particular citation. Otherwise, you've just created a purposely argumentative thread.Many here are surely familiar with the claims that Obama is a closet socialist.