Calm down.

Oskar Lange, a proponent of Socialism in the 1930s wrote:

““The real danger of socialism, is that of a bureaucratization of economic life.”

Now read about all the bureaucracies that Obama wants to create: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/#jumpstart

I wouldn’t call Obama a socialist in the classical sense, “socialism” as such has failed. But Obama is definitely socialistic, “neo-socialist” if you will.

“Yesterday, a few readers protested because I said that the current candidates used socialist rhetoric. In the comments, I even pointed to socialist actions.”

Sounds to me like that indicated BOTH of them. This particular post was specific to Obama, yes, but just because the opportunity presented itself, as she also pointed out, right at the beginning of the post.

Again – I gave greater leeway than I would for myself or people I know in such a situation, by asking for some credible source. If it were someone I was directly associated with, I would call them on it if there were no disclaimer INSIDE THE BOOK. And I would expect others to do the same for me.

Because she can’t. Hypocrisy knows no bounds with politicians, both left and right. The difference between the left and right pundits is that the right will never admit when it is wrong. 8 years of Bush and nary a word from the likes of Shammity, Limpbaugh, skeletor Coulter and right wing bloggers about the abundance of mistakes, blunders and greed of this administration. I believe that they are so embarassed by Bush that they would rather sweep him under the rug and pretend that he was never here. They want a mulligan by foisting McCain as something new and “maverick”, when there is no indication that he will be any different than the boy king. Malkin denounces the bailout bill and then spins it of course into a democratic backed bungle even thought Shrub and his cronies are the ones who put this little corporate welfare plan together (I am extremely happy, BTW, that the execs at AIG got their little retreat after we gave them $85B – we wouldn’t want them to suffer, after all. 3 guesses as to which party the top brass in that org. is loyal to).
The right will never admit that Bush and co. have been a colossal f**k up and have now ushered in a new era of lowered standard of living expectations for future generations. It is highly possible that the recent financial crisis may be irreversible – there is no stimulus on the horizon. Republicans will not go against their own, however, no matter if the ship is sinking. Bush should have been thrown out of office 4 years ago, but unfortunately the best the dems could muster was a laughable candidate in Kerry. MANY financial experts saw this coming, but the repeated mantra of the “fundamentals are strong” from all of the right wing bloggers and pundits as well as a complicit media convinced Americans to keep gorging at the credit buffet. Repubs, if not entirely responsible for this debacle, at least need to own up to their complacency regarding the warning signs that were present 5 years ago. McCain in particular (since he is a POTUS candidate) SHOULD be under intense scrutiny for his repeated dereg stance. Rank and file neorepublicons (certainly can’t call them conservatives anymore) will never call him out. As an independent I will tell you that there is enough to disgust me on both sides, but given that McCain intends to stay the course (straight into the iceberg) I will be forced to vote for a less than ideal candidate in Obama. And yes, I will be more than willing to criticize his performance when it is merited for all of you who will cry hypocrisy at my comments.

Oh, and Glynn, you’re wrong. The rebublican party does stand for something – greed, lies, corruption, complicity, apathy and debt.

You have no standards. It’s just name calling. The “Right” stands for absolutely nothing.

Shameful.

Link

So, Barack Obama was at one point a member of the New Party, a party so far to the left that even the Green Party didn’t like them.

That’s the proof; you have failed to refute any of it. Instead, you fall to the ad hominem fallacy (again) of attacking the messenger and not the message.

The burden, Sir, is now on you. Prove that Barack Obama is not a socialist.

I like this “reasoning”, becasue it basically says that incredibly partisan politically interested people/groups/websites are what should pass for sources – and for grand assertions like saying Obama’s a socialist and is in league with the likes of Hitler.

Gee, I wonder what politically interested adversaries of Obama will say about him? Bad things? Good things? Whatever they are – we oughtta trust them!

So Obama’s a black-seperatist communist Muslim terrorist according to these “sources”? Well, that’s all reasonable and intellectually honest.

And just think – my only problem w/ McCain is that I don’t agree with his policies!

Exactly. I named my standard of proof, now meet it.