Governor Rick Perry called President Barack Obama a socialist who also loves his country. Those who support Western European-style socialist policies don't understand the power of private markets, or government's inefficiency and incompetence.
Answering a question from Bill O'Reilly, Governor Perry created a buzz by responding that President Obama is a socialist, though he was quick to add that the president loves his country and simply doesn't understand how America's market-based economy works. If the president understood the private sector, Governor Perry explained, he wouldn't pursue tax and regulatory policies that crush job-creators and prevent wealth creation.
There are two types of socialism. One is authoritarian socialism seen in the Eastern Bloc countries (many of which are now free-market economies) and some nations in Central and South America. It's used by harsh and oppressive authoritarian regimes that repress their people.
The other type of socialism is a big-government philosophy that uses wealth redistribution to fund a massive nanny state of cradle-to-grave entitlements. We see this type of socialism in many Western European and Mediterranean countries that are friends and allies of our country, such as Spain, Italy, France, and Greece.
Governor Perry was referring to this Western European socialism. President Obama believes that government has all the answers if led by enlightened leaders (as he fancies himself), and believes he will improve everyone's lot. Perry referenced Obama's infamous exchange with Joe the Plumber, where Obama infamously said when government spreads the wealth it's better for everyone.
The term "socialism" is misunderstood by many, and the Left spins it as if calling someone a socialist is a personal attack. They do this to avoid serious discussion of socialism's impact.
There are two components to socialism. It's a philosophy that government owes to everyone in society a certain standard of living. It includes government-provided or subsidized food, housing, education, and healthcare.
Socialism provides entitlements through massive taxation, and also believes that heavy government regulation leads to a better society. It does all this in the name of "social justice."
No honest person can deny that President Obama's policies fit these criteria. Government-run healthcare (and calling it a fundamental right, despite the fact that it's nowhere mentioned in the Constitution). Federal control of education. Government picking winners and losers in the economy.
History repeatedly shows that free markets work over time, and socialism does not. But we don't need to plumb the depths of world history. We have our own recent history.
Since Obamacare, employers have reported that they will have to drop insurance policies covering tens of millions of Americans, and Medicaid spending will increase by $434 billion by 2020.
After (partially) bailing out the housing market, housing remains a depressed and failing sector, and Fannie and Freddie have the gall to ask for $6 billion is additional taxpayer money while paying $13 million in bonuses to their executives.
And this administration deludes itself that it knows how to invest in business. So it gives $535 million in loan guarantees to Solyndra as a good investment, only to see the company promptly go bankrupt. Just for good measure the energy secretary illegally restructured this scam to pay off President Obama's fundraisers and stick you with the bill.
Arrogance and incompetence are a toxic combination. This White House and its cronies are overflowing with both. So Governor Perry argues that America needs someone new in the White House.
Rick Perry's Wife Calls Obama Socialist Too
Perry stands by ad, calls Obama a 'socialist'
Rick Perry ad: Obama comments "pathetic," positions "socialist"
In newest ad, Perry calls Obama remark 'pathetic'
Eurozone crisis: Spain's election leaves markets on edge
Poll: Romney leading Obama in Mich.
'Socialist' Obama voters, Muslims should stay away from my concealed weapon ...
That's right: Instead we understand the private market's inefficiency and incompetence! (Not to mention corruption and inequality.).
Money good. Rich people have money. Rich people are good.
No money bad. Poor people have no money. Poor people are bad.
No wonder the GOP has become the party of no. They can't even decipher what the other side is saying.
One more observation on the "sanctity of life" front:
FTA: "Government-run healthcare (and calling it a fundamental right, despite the fact that it's nowhere mentioned in the Constitution)."
Any Constitutional scholar worth is salt knows that fundamental rights are often not enumerated *because* they are so fundamentally obvious. That's why, historically speaking, we have the Ninth Amendment. There are fundamental rights that are, or should be, so basic that they need no itemization.
We so often hear about the "God-given right to life."
Well, if that's so, then we have a God-given right to health care, because health care protects life.
You commit a worse error, however. "... paved roads, schools, police, fire department, parks, libraries, town halls, city halls, etc....." are most assuredly NOT the result of socialism.
They are ALL "public goods" and supported in the role of government by all by the most doctrinaire Libertarians. Now that you know, it is a LIE to pretend otherwise.
Finally, it is disingenuous in the extreme for a social democrat to appeal to Christian values when her own ideology is based on making secualrism into a religion.
public: maintained at the expense of, serving, or for the use of a community
socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of ownership and control in the community as a whole.
Therefore, public goods ARE primary elements of socialism.
You might be referring to Socialism, something else and something very specific. WHile Socialism has failed, socialism in a necessary aspect of a functioning Capitalistic or Democratic society according to the progenitors of the terms as we use them today.
Is it "socialism" to use state funds to build and maintain state universities, public roadways? Public schools? Poorhouses? Arguably yes.
The level of actual socialism has been dwindling in America and not rising. It is the advocation of corporate profit over public interest that is raging out of control in America. The privatization of public assets, prisons, toll roads, public parking, state stores, public parks, ... all have fallen across the country to sheer and utter corporate greed. Services fail and control is lost. Abuses are the hallmark of privatization in America!
Sorry, gentlemen, but the phrase "nanny state socialism" is a Frank Luntz loser. Saying it with two voices at once makes it sound even more ridiculous.
OWS is teaching Americans that our perceptions of Corporate Overreach are absolutely true. The tide has turned against greed and theft, fraud and untruths.
Your words do not ring hollow, ... They simply do not ring at all.
What he means is the public sector, at least that
whis for sale to the real private sector(if we had $$$)
The real,private sector is who should have been bailed out;
the banks were aware the economy was going broke and let it ride.
It would have made more sense to pay off all the home loans.
But we did not pay off the home loans to the real private sector;
and the only socialism the president knows anything about is
C O R P O R A T E S O C I A L I S M
(oh, you were talking about the government . . . that is owned by corporations too.)
If you truly believe in free market capitalism, then eliminate all legislative means for controlling any business that does not openly and unambiguously involve criminal enterprise. If there are consumers for such a business' goods/services, then the consumer should have unbridled choice (even if it is contrary to his/her interests--health, financial stability, or otherwise) and the business should be unencumbered to act to maximize profits.
There should be no policies, funds, programs, or anything else to enable government protection for or support of individuals or business, that is not explicitly set out in the U.S. Constitution.
If you don't believe government funded or mandated healthcare, then complete eliminate medicare/medicaid, disability support or workplace injury compensation schemes. Those programs support the health of people (children, the infirm, the old) that haven't paid into the system, have not been able to or no longer can pay into the system on par with their demands on it, or may have made bad life choices or been struck with bad luck that result in others not directly responsible for the plight having to pay for their care.
If you don't believe in government redistribution of wealth, completely eliminate social security, or any form of government subsidized pensions or other social support payments. Those programs involve government taking money from individual citizens, putting it into a collective account, and then distributing the funds to other citizens.
Any sort of military verterans' healthcare or income support must also be eliminated on principle that the process and principle behind such programs are illegitimate. Also, veterans were paid for their service and should have known what the demands of the job ultimately might be (the job just happened to involve the risk of death or injury, but then so do any other number of occupations that would seemingly not deserve such benefits).
Think about it. The US has absolutely no need for a military as large as we have unless we use it to meddle in other countries. We are perhaps the country in the world most geographically and logistically invulnerable to attack, so why the enormous defense forces? Why not channel those resources into the health and education of our citizens?
Socialism is only a disaster if you are 1) the head of a corporation making obscene profits off the backs of non-unionized workers, 2) military contractors, 3) in the pocket of number 1 and 2.
"History repeatedly shows that free markets work over time, and socialism does not. But we don't need to plumb the depths of world history. We have our own recent history."
History shows us no such thing. And we do have our own recent history - the socialist New Deal that created the great American middle class and ushered in our most prosperous era.
We also have Canada, Germany and the Scandinavian nations to look to - all of them more well educated, healthier and more prosperous than our own, with greater social mobility. And why? Socialism intelligently integrated into a controlled capitalist framework.
Unchecked capitalism is a danger to life, to liberty and to the pursuit of happiness for all except the 1%. We can't stop the corporatist right from spreading lies, but we can sure educate ourselves to stop listening to them.
The worst thing about allowing everyone to vote, it that it allows everyone to vote. That is quite a double edged sword.
Why are we paying over twice as much as most industrialized nations for health care, with outcomes that rate us 37th in the world (http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html) in efficacy?
Capitalism, and the free market principle only work when there is competition. Something we no longer have in the US.
When you're "Too Big To Fail" you aren't answerable to anyone.
Small wonder Big Business does what it wants.
The American taxpayer is the one who pays for their failures.