Socialist Party Derides Rick Perry 'Fairy Tale' Of Obama As Socialist

The Socialist Party USA is more than a little skeptical of Texas Gov. Rick Perry's claim Sunday that President Barack Obama belongs in their ranks.

"The notion that Barack Obama is a socialist ranks among the greatest fairy tales in American society -- right up there with the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and the idea that if you work hard enough your children will live a better life than you," Socialist Party spokeswoman Lynn Lomibao said in an email. "Socialists know what Obama is: another corporate funded politician placed in the White House to protect the wealth and status of the 1 percent."

Perry made his claim during the Sunday morning Republican presidential debate, when asked if he considered Obama opposed to the "founding ideals" of the United States.

"I make a very proud statement and a fact that we have a president that's a socialist." Perry said. "I don’t think our founding fathers wanted America to be a socialist country. So I disagree with that premise that somehow or another that President Obama reflects our founding fathers."

Perry went on to say that states could do a better job delivering education, health care and environmental regulation than the federal government. Obama's signature policy accomplishment in his first term is a sweeping federal health care reform law that will in 2014 require uninsured Americans to buy health coverage from private insurance companies.

The Socialist Party, which The New York Times reported last year has 1,000 members, doesn't see much socialism coming from the Obama administration.

"When Americans needed a solution to mass unemployment, Obama gave away billions in cash to bail out the banks," Lomibao wrote. "When Americans needed a single-payer healthcare system, Obama promoted a pro-health insurance healthcare 'reform' package that forced millions into junk healthcare plans subsidized by public funds. And when American workers asked for the right to join a union without employer harassment through the Employee Free Choice Act, Obama showed who he really answers to by betraying the promises he made to working people during his campaign."

The Socialist Party's presidential ticket consists of perennial candidate Stewart Alexander and former Marine Alex Mendoza.

Comments

[semilegal]

09:51 AM on 06/07/2012

based on the news today (Obama signed-up for the "new" [Socialist] party in 1996 via contract) ... maybe the Huffington Post would like to reconsider this story? Truth hurts and socialism leads nowhere good; many examples of that, including our president.

[Patrick Labbe]

12:20 PM on 01/21/2012

It is a total myth that Obama is a Socialist. When I called into to POTUS on Sirius/XM on Friday I was asked by the host if I thought OBAMA was a socialist. I responded with I WISH! Oh well the RePUKEicans and the DUMBacrats have become essentially the parties of the 1%. Only SOCIALISM offers the 99% soultion. www.socialistpartysc.org

[socialistpartyusala]

03:58 PM on 01/11/2012

I joined the Socialist Party because I felt that 1.) I, as a taxpayer, couldn't stomach the idea that I help finance civilian casualties, 2.) where equality and human rights are concerned, concessions are unacceptable, and 3.) I wanted to participate in spreading the Party's message. Capitalism has left a disgusting and tragic trail of suffering in its wake. The quest to profit at the expense of the people is simply unacceptable. Obama is just another in a line of elected officials who market themselves on platforms of change, hope and care for the people. The thing is, they can not deliver on these sorts of promises in our capitalist system. I think it's okay for the U.S. public to take the power back. I'm sure the concept is a frightening one for the Dems and the GOP, and maybe it should be. If organized, the power of the people can pack a pretty mighty punch.

[Patrick Labbe]

12:28 PM on 01/21/2012

We are trying to organize a chapter of the Socialist Party USA in the South Carolina area. Go to: www.socialistpartysc.org

[tangelan]

02:57 PM on 01/11/2012

"When Americans needed a solution to mass unemployment, Obama gave away billions in cash to bail out the banks," Lomibao wrote."

That happened before Obama was elected. Be angry but be factual.

[Eris23Skidoo]

06:29 PM on 01/12/2012

No fooling. I expect that kind of "fast and loose with facts" type of statement from conservative con-men, but socialists are usually accurate in their criticism. That guy just came off as yet another partisan.

[redjersey]

02:58 PM on 01/13/2012

but Obama continues to give away cash to corporations. The TARP was also supported by the Democratic Party, so which it might not be Obama's TARP it's the Democrats TARP as much as its Bush's. The auto bail-out was another issue. A Socialist would have nationalized the industry and put it under public control. Instead of propping up business and making profits for shareholders we would have transformed it - possibly converting the industry to create more fuel efficient autos and building trains light rail, etc. Bush pushed TARP through but all signs showed so woudl Obama and so DID the Democrats.

[George Cummings]

10:09 AM on 01/11/2012

What the vast majority of americans want and what the cons want to call socialism is simply ethics in daily practice. Who doesn't want ethics in the world? See my following thoughts:
Ethics and compassion, I have a rant in the back of my mind i've been working on a while now about sociopaths­, the business and political climate of the last 30 years and the opportunit­ies for affirmativ­e action they've had at their disposal. Lots of them probably in more positions of authority now than ever before.
Add to that the faceless internet, where the mask can come off without losing them the facade they've built up in real life that enables them to pass as human. Go too far..move on to another forum or user name. Curing the boredom that is the bane of that type AND perhaps helping to make a world more friendly for their games.
The rant needs work though.. another time.

[George Cummings]

10:16 AM on 01/11/2012

then there's the 'learned sociopathy' verses the genetic kind. When the system fails to socialize people and rewards the behavior.
Which increases their numbers beyond the 2 to 4% thought to exist naturally/biologically.

[Eris23Skidoo]

06:32 PM on 01/12/2012

Who doesn't want ethics in the world? I'll tell you who. Libertarians. According to their knock-off version of classical economics, ethics are inefficient. But then their philosophy advocates that every industry should be run by a single corporate monopoly who provided a great product or service once but has since turned that success into complete domination of the market and now they have a monopoly where they produce overpriced junk.

[jsgaetano]

09:31 AM on 01/11/2012

Nobody ever accused conservatives of knowing what they're talking about.

[Stormchaser776]

04:31 AM on 01/11/2012

Anybody ever stop to think that at some point in time we had something that drove this nation to become what it is today? and that wasnt Capitalism, or Socialism, or Communism... It was called COOPERATIVISM. The first 13 colonies lived, thrived and worked towards making it a point to have this as their economical and social platform, as not only did it involve people in an economic mindset, but also in a social and honorable way. I guess thats me thinking impossible things can happen, but, to me it looks like that was a way of economics/social structure everyone benefited and could grow with. Funny how democrats and Republicans both hve some issue with this concept. Could it be that this is the true answer to the mess we are in now?

[Eris23Skidoo]

06:34 PM on 01/12/2012

If you say "cooperate" too close to a con-man, he'll call you a commie.

[Stormchaser776]

07:05 PM on 01/12/2012

I just wonder, where or when, in the educational system all of this movement and history go? when did everyone forget the backbone that was what made this country so great?

[Benkai Debussy]

06:24 PM on 05/07/2012

You're looking at the past through a rose-tinted lens. The "golden age" of America that you're referring to is as real as King Arthur was in England. Nearly every person you read about from the 18th century was a wealthy white landowner. As bad as things are now, they're better than they were at any point prior to the adoption of social welfare.

The closest thing I've seen to an economy that worked well for most citizens and didn't hugely benefit from exploiting developing nations (cheap goods + outsourced labor in the US) is former Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia's economy collapsed because it was targeted by the US/Western Europe for "not being open to foreign investment"; a crime that has destroyed the economies of multiple nations. Citizens in Yugoslavia had a high standard of living for many years prior.

Specifically, Yugoslavia had something called Workers' Self-management. All businesses were co-owned and democratically run by employees. Despite common beliefs, socialism has nothing to do with state-owned businesses; anyone can create a business, but they have to give an equal voice to those they employ*. While it's easy to think of problems with such a system, *it worked.* Whatever problems it had pale in comparison to those with capitalism.

I can't think of any reason to allow the capitalist/ownership class to exist when there's a proven example of a healthy economy existing without one.

* Managers exist, but they are elected and can be removed by other employees.

[Julia Caskey Marshall]

11:05 PM on 01/10/2012

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."
-- FDR

[jsgaetano]

09:32 AM on 01/11/2012

Now everyone knows the roots of why conservatives hate FDR so much. Conservative ideology is just rebranded fascism, after all.

[George Cummings]

09:57 AM on 01/11/2012

how much more obvious could it be at this point?

[Patrick Labbe]

02:13 PM on 01/21/2012

If only Henry Wallace had been VPO when FDR died we would have a much different and better country. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Party_(United_States,_1948)

[Stormchaser776]

07:01 PM on 01/12/2012

You wanna know what makes this so funny? When Hugo Chavez said the same thing word for word in a speech once, it was broadcasted all over the world as "a dictator that wants his country to reform into a socialist/communist place" sometimes you can't help but wonder, are all the "rights" completeley right and all the "wrongs" completely wrong?

[Patrick Labbe]

02:14 PM on 01/21/2012

Hugo Chavez is a HERO. www.socialistpartysc.org

[Saigon Sam]

11:02 PM on 01/10/2012

Excerpt from New Party publication (Courtesy New Zeal blog)
JERUSALEM – Evidence has emerged that Sen. Barack Obama belonged to a socialist political party that sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.

Several blogs, including Powerline, previously documented that while running for the Illinois state Senate in 1996 as a Democrat, Obama actively sought and received the endorsement of the socialist-oriented New Party, with some blogs claiming Obama was a member of the

[Eris23Skidoo]

06:37 PM on 01/12/2012

Bore me with your conspiracy theories and slander.

[Kristof Liberato]

11:01 PM on 01/10/2012

From the Socialist Party USA Statement of Principles­:

"Socialism is not mere government ownership, a welfare state, or a repressive bureaucrac­y. Socialism is a new social and economic order in which workers and consumers control production and community residents control their neighborho­ods, homes, and schools.

The production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few. Socialism produces a constantly renewed future by not plundering the resources of the earth.
Under capitalist and authoritar­ian "Communist­" states, people have little control over fundamenta­l areas of their lives. The capitalist system forces workers to sell their abilities and skills to the few who own the workplaces­, profit from these workers' labor, and use the government to maintain their privileged position. Under authoritar­ian "Communist­" states, decisions are made by Communist Party officials, the bureaucrac­y and the military. The inevitable product of each system is a class society with gross inequality of privileges­, a draining of the productive wealth and goods of the society into military purposes, environmen­tal pollution, and war in which workers are compelled to fight other workers"

[Patrick Labbe]

02:15 PM on 01/21/2012

Go Socialist Party USA. www.socialistpartysc.org

[Veronica Nowakowski]

10:50 PM on 01/10/2012

From the Socialist Party USA Statement of Principles:

Socialism is not mere government ownership, a welfare state, or a repressive bureaucracy. Socialism is a new social and economic order in which workers and consumers control production and community residents control their neighborhoods, homes, and schools.

The production of society is used for the benefit of all humanity, not for the private profit of a few. Socialism produces a constantly renewed future by not plundering the resources of the earth.
Under capitalist and authoritarian "Communist" states, people have little control over fundamental areas of their lives. The capitalist system forces workers to sell their abilities and skills to the few who own the workplaces, profit from these workers' labor, and use the government to maintain their privileged position. Under authoritarian "Communist" states, decisions are made by Communist Party officials, the bureaucracy and the military. The inevitable product of each system is a class society with gross inequality of privileges, a draining of the productive wealth and goods of the society into military purposes, environmental pollution, and war in which workers are compelled to fight other workers.... Read more on the site.

[wot]

10:10 PM on 01/10/2012

"When Americans needed a solution to mass unemployment, Obama gave away billions in cash to bail out the banks"

One more time – Obama did not bail out the banks, that was TARP for 700 Billion, signed into law by George W. Bush October 3, 2008 before Obama was even elected. And don’t forget the involvement of Hank Paulson, former CEO of Goldman Sachs.

[Kristof Liberato]

10:39 PM on 01/10/2012

Obama voted for the bailout bill and also promoted it while campaigning. He also gave a way a lot of funding with the stimulus package.

[Eris23Skidoo]

06:41 PM on 01/12/2012

Obama was one of 100 senators who voted on that bill. Many of the 100 senators who voted for that bill were republicans. Are you going to go all out against the white republicans too or do you reserve your criticism only for black democrats?

[Epilef2000]

09:46 PM on 01/10/2012

I am pretty sure that no primary, middle or high school will teach students what social democrats stand for, let alone explain the difference between marxist, communist, market communism, or the various type of different economic systems that existed or exist, There is only free market theory as adocated by Milton Friedman...

[mumi009]

08:55 AM on 01/11/2012

Honestly, I don't think the majority of Americans have the intellectual curiosity or capacity to grasp these differences.

Most Western European countries are social democracies with capitalistic economic form tempered by a high social conscience.

What European countries have is a strong sense of solidarity and a responsibility for the better off to help their fellow citizens who aren't.

Of course their are less well-off people who abuse the system. There are also 1%-er who abuse the system, too.

[George Cummings]

10:14 AM on 01/11/2012

It was that way 45 years ago. No real info..just the glorious benefits of capitalism.
Yet even then as a kid I'm sitting there thinking 'well..I have a job building cars, joe here has a job making parts for the car. I buy his car parts, he buys the car and we both get rich. How Does That Work?' Well..now I know..it doesn't.
Ponzi scheme.
Just a very, very long term and huge one.

[Snoopie141]

08:45 PM on 01/10/2012

Well if Obama is a socialist, and Repubs are saying they are gettiing 99% of everything they want from him, would that not make they socialist too??

[Snoopie141]

08:48 PM on 01/10/2012

Sorry typo police, it should read.....would that not make THEM socialist too?

[George Cummings]

12:06 PM on 01/11/2012

so sorry, but it's possible to believe ANYTHING when you not only completely lack any vestige of intellectual honesty but have never even heard the term.
'Faith Based Logic'.

[bradley ross]

08:42 PM on 01/10/2012

Well considering he got a D in economics and a C in History, Perry probably doesn't remember anything he may have ever learned about socialism.