Corporatist Not Socialist

[lazarus]

NEW ORLEANS–Republicans and tea party activists are fond of accusing President Barack Obama of being a socialist, but today party gadfly Ron Paul said they had it wrong.

“In the technical sense, in the economic definition, he is not a socialist,” the Texas Republican said to a smattering of applause at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.

“He’s a corporatist,” Paul quickly added, meaning the president takes “care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country.”

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/04/10/ron-paul-barack-obama-is-not-a-socialist/?mod=rss_WSJBlog

This is why I like Ron Paul. He thinks for himself.

Isn't corporatism what the right wing wants?

[bonnie]

NEW ORLEANS–Republicans and tea party activists are fond of accusing President Barack Obama of being a socialist, but today party gadfly Ron Paul said they had it wrong.

“In the technical sense, in the economic definition, he is not a socialist,” the Texas Republican said to a smattering of applause at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.

“He’s a corporatist,” Paul quickly added, meaning the president takes “care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country.”

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/04/10/ron-paul-barack-obama-is-not-a-socialist/?mod=rss_WSJBlog

This is why I like Ron Paul. He thinks for himself.

Isn't corporatism what the right wing wants?

Nope. Ron Paul's opinion does not negate Obama's background,his associations,his close friends and mentors since early childhood.

[phkrause]

NEW ORLEANS–Republicans and tea party activists are fond of accusing President Barack Obama of being a socialist, but today party gadfly Ron Paul said they had it wrong.

“In the technical sense, in the economic definition, he is not a socialist,” the Texas Republican said to a smattering of applause at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.

“He’s a corporatist,” Paul quickly added, meaning the president takes “care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country.”

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/04/10/ron-paul-barack-obama-is-not-a-socialist/?mod=rss_WSJBlog

This is why I like Ron Paul. He thinks for himself.

Isn't corporatism what the right wing wants?

Have to agree with you Lazarus about him being a thinker or as I like to say using his own brain and not allowing the party to do his thinking for him. There are not many on either side. Don't always agree with him personally. He does remind me of the new senator of Mass who also does a bit of that.

pk

[bonnie]

Quote:

This is why I like Ron Paul. He thinks for himself.

Isn't corporatism what the right wing wants?

Quote:

Have to agree with you Lazarus about him being a thinker or as I like to say using his own brain and not allowing the party to do his thinking for him. There are not many on either side. Don't always agree with him personally. He does remind me of the new senator of Mass who also does a bit of that.

pk

Ron Paul was opposed to most of what Obama ran on if I remember right. I know he opposed Obama health care and the stimulus. Is the liking for Ron Paul's thinking now because he has stated he doesn't think Obama a socialist?

Would either of the two of you voted for Ron Paul instead of Obama?

[phkrause]

Just because I like a person doesn't mean I agree with him. I like McCain and always have. I like a lot of the things that he is for and there are things that I don't like. That goes for both parties. From what I heard and understand McCain and Obama were pretty much in the same ballpark on what they wanted with little bits of difference's on how to achieve those goals. And as far as Bush, I always thought he did what he had to do. I liked him a lot, didn't necessarily agree with everything, but who agree's with everything that there party does?

pk

[karl]

Isn't corporatism what the right wing wants?

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." -- Thomas Jefferson -- The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

[lazarus]

Ron Paul was opposed to most of what Obama ran on if I remember right. I know he opposed Obama health care and the stimulus. Is the liking for Ron Paul's thinking now because he has stated he doesn't think Obama a socialist?

Would either of the two of you voted for Ron Paul instead of Obama?

I've said I like Ron Paul a number of times before in other threads. He thinks for himself. He doesn't accept the political garbage that's handed down from the right wing or left wing media.

Any right winger here willing to accept Paul's position.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

Ron Paul was opposed to most of what Obama ran on if I remember right. I know he opposed Obama health care and the stimulus. Is the liking for Ron Paul's thinking now because he has stated he doesn't think Obama a socialist?

Would either of the two of you voted for Ron Paul instead of Obama?

I've said I like Ron Paul a number of times before in other threads. He thinks for himself. He doesn't accept the political garbage that's handed down from the right wing or left wing media.

Any right winger here willing to accept Paul's position.

What is there about others believing Obama a socialist that disturbs you? It is not illegal.You don't seem to be all that concerned about socialism yourself.

From the earliest childhood of Obama the influences of his life have been at the least socialist ideology and worse. Bill Ayers is a strange person a personal acquaintance of Obama.He certainly had to know what he was about. Murder was not out of the question for him

Along with self proclaimed communists,the first president we are aware of to appoint communists to places of power within the administration,a stated desire to "redistribute wealth"using the power of the government to force americans to purchase a product.

Ron Paul is against almost everything that Obama stands for or would like to implement in this country. The same reasons as more and more of the american people so how is Ron Paul different in his thinking.

Everything about Obama indicates his political ideology.

You certainly can have acquaintances that do not view issues the same. But it is hard to believe that all known acquaintances,religious mentors,and groups that he joined are of socialist mentality and he is not.

Especially when what he says offers the best picture of what he is

[karl]

I certainly agree with these positions of Ron Paul as expressed to Forbes:

"Congress should dramatically reduce its overseas commitments, as well as spending in areas like corporate welfare, and devote one-half of the savings to debt reduction and the other half to transitioning to a market system of retirement security and health care.

"This action will allow the government to meet its obligation to those relying on Social Security and Medicare while allowing younger people to escape the mountains of debt we are leaving--$60 trillion of liabilities.

"As president, one of my priorities will be restoring the 10th amendment and federalism. Decisions about issues like civil unions or right-to-die legislation should be made by the states, not the federal government.

"I will stop federal judges from imposing new definitions on the States. I will also return control over education to parents and local communities. Decisions about whether or not to fund vouchers, have merit pay for teachers or extend the school year should be made by parents and local school boards, not by D.C.-based bureaucrats.

"I will also pursue true free trade with low tariffs and less burdensome regulation. However, I reject the 'managed trade' approach of the World Trade Organization, North American Free Trade Agreement and Central American Free Trade Agreement."

Web site: http://www.ronpaul2008.com

[bonnie]

I certainly agree with these positions of Ron Paul as expressed to Forbes:

"Congress should dramatically reduce its overseas commitments, as well as spending in areas like corporate welfare, and devote one-half of the savings to debt reduction and the other half to transitioning to a market system of retirement security and health care.

"This action will allow the government to meet its obligation to those relying on Social Security and Medicare while allowing younger people to escape the mountains of debt we are leaving--$60 trillion of liabilities.

"As president, one of my priorities will be restoring the 10th amendment and federalism. Decisions about issues like civil unions or right-to-die legislation should be made by the states, not the federal government.

"I will stop federal judges from imposing new definitions on the States. I will also return control over education to parents and local communities. Decisions about whether or not to fund vouchers, have merit pay for teachers or extend the school year should be made by parents and local school boards, not by D.C.-based bureaucrats.

"I will also pursue true free trade with low tariffs and less burdensome regulation. However, I reject the 'managed trade' approach of the World Trade Organization, North American Free Trade Agreement and Central American Free Trade Agreement."

Web site: http://www.ronpaul2008.com

That wasn't my point.In all area's that matter Ron Paul is against what Obama is all about.As it relates to Obama his thinking is really no different than most that fear the direction we are headed at Obama's hands.

It seems if he voices an opinion that Obama is not a socialist that can be taken to the bank.He is given credit for being an independent thinker.What is the opinion on his independent thinking when he opposes Obama's scheme's for the country.

Could he be right on Obama care,cap and trade,the stimulus etc?

[karl]

Originally Posted By: karl

I certainly agree with these positions of Ron Paul as expressed to Forbes:

"I will also pursue true free trade with low tariffs and less burdensome regulation. However, I reject the 'managed trade' approach of the World Trade Organization, North American Free Trade Agreement and Central American Free Trade Agreement."

Web site: http://www.ronpaul2008.com

That wasn't my point.In all area's that matter Ron Paul is against what Obama is all about.As it relates to Obama his thinking is really no different than most that fear the direction we are headed at Obama's hands.

It seems if he voices an opinion that Obama is not a socialist that can be taken to the bank.He is given credit for being an independent thinker.What is the opinion on his independent thinking when he opposes Obama's scheme's for the country.

Could he be right on Obama care,cap and trade,the stimulus etc?

Ron Paul was not downplaying Obama's socialism. He was stating that Obama is an unusual socialist who redistributes our wealth to corporations as well as doing all the odious things Fabian socialists usually promote.

Go to Ronpaul.com for his beliefs on a wide range of subjects, but this below tells me he's my man.

"About a hundred years ago or so, freedom was divided into two pieces. Economic liberty and personal liberty. For no good reasons. The founders didn’t believe that. Personal civil liberties were the same as economic liberties. If you believe in civil liberties for personal choices, you ought to believe in economic choices as well. We need to put that back together, it makes sense.....

The ultimate goal of all our political action should be to strive for liberty, that is what I’m dedicated to. I’ve been for a lot of years. And there’s a lot more interest right now, mainly because the country is in trouble. But our goal should be for seeking liberty. Now, why do we seek liberty? Well the purpose of a free society is for we as individuals be responsible for ourselves, to take care of ourselves, financially and take care of our families. But it’s also there to seek excellence and virtue. That should be the ultimate goal of what we are as individuals. And if you have an authoritarian government, for whatever reason, if you only pick off a little bit of it and somebody else picks off a little bit, pretty soon it’s a total authoritarian government and that is what we’re approaching. ...

If we allow the government to promote economic equality, which the liberal do-gooders want. “Oh yes, injustices, we got to take care of it and it will be better and it will be fair and equal to everybody.” We know, everybody in this audience knows, socialism fails. It might make everybody equal, but they’re all going to be equally poor.