Difference between revisions of "Myths/Obama is a socialist"

From CWRE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{hdr/myth|Barack Obama is a socialist; the Obama administration advocates socialist policies}} ==Myth== ===Examples=== * "After eight years of Obama-style socialism, we n...")
 
Line 18: Line 18:
 
==Sources==
 
==Sources==
 
<references>
 
<references>
<ref name=TRMS>'''2015-04-22''' [http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/thats-not-what-socialism-means That’s not what 'socialism' means] (by Steve Benen)</ref>
+
<ref name=TRMS>'''2015-04-22''' [http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/thats-not-what-socialism-means That’s not what 'socialism' means] (by Steve Benen)(via [https://plus.google.com/u/0/+TheRachelMaddowShow/posts/91Q2Gpmk278 Google+]</ref>
 
<ref name=bloomberg>'''2015-04-21''' [http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-21/ted-cruz-says-president-obama-is-an-unmitigated-socialist- Ted Cruz Says President Obama Is an 'Unmitigated Socialist']</ref>
 
<ref name=bloomberg>'''2015-04-21''' [http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-21/ted-cruz-says-president-obama-is-an-unmitigated-socialist- Ted Cruz Says President Obama Is an 'Unmitigated Socialist']</ref>
 +
</references>

Revision as of 22:40, 22 April 2015

Myth: Barack Obama is a socialist; the Obama administration advocates socialist policies

Myth

Examples

Reality

You've got to be kidding me.


Look, there’s no reason for “socialism” to serve as a synonym for “stuff Republicans don’t like.” It’s an actual word with a fairly specific meaning, involving public ownership of the means of production.

And it in no way reflects the Obama era. After corporate profits reached all-time highs, the stock markets reached all-time highs, and the sharp drop in the unemployment rate was based almost entirely on private-sector job growth, I thought to myself, “Well, at least they’ll stop calling Obama a ‘socialist.’” But here we are anyway, hearing the same nonsense.

Have we considered the possibility that Republicans literally don’t know what “socialism” means? Isn’t it plausible that knee-jerk partisans have relied so heavily on the word for so long that they simply have lost track of its definition?

Cruz complained last year, “Right now, the top 1 percent in this country … earn a higher share of our national income than any time since 1928.” I’m curious: does the far-right senator believe those are economic conditions created by “an unmitigated socialist”? Or does Cruz believe the president is just really ineffective in implementing his socialist vision?


—Steve Benen[2]

Sources