Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama's Socialism
The American Thinker ^ | February 25, 2010 | Adam Shaw

Posted on 02/25/2010 3:31:57 AM PST by Scanian

Recently on "The O'Reilly Factor," Bill O'Reilly seemed very concerned about President Obama being described as a socialist by members of the right such as Rush Limbaugh. O'Reilly has often dodged calling the president a socialist, as if doing so would condemn Obama as a tyrannical dictator. It was discussed throughout the show with various guests, and O'Reilly frequently stated that yes, Obama is a far-left guy, but he didn't want to use the actual term "socialist." It would be too much.

Here in Britain we look at the continuing battle as to whether Obama is a socialist or not as a rather odd American quibble. In Britain we have no problem defining people as socialists, nor do people on the left have a problem calling themselves socialists. It is not that those of us on the conservative right do not believe that socialism is a bad doctrine. We do, and we see evidence of its continual destruction of the country on a day-to-day basis, but we have always had socialism living quite openly amongst us. We are therefore able to see and recognize it quite calmly as a day-to-day occurrence in politics, just as one recognizes the flu. We wish it didn't exist, but it does, and so we get on with our lives, trying to avoid catching it in the process.

When one looks back at the prime ministers that the British Labour Party has produced in the twentieth century -- James Ramsay MacDonald, Clement Attlee, Harold Wilson, James Callaghan etc. -- all have defined themselves as socialists at one time or another. Even the relatively centrist Tony Blair described himself as "Coming to Socialism through Marxism" and is a member of the Christian Socialist Movement.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: billoreilly; labourparty; leftists; marclamonthill; socialism; statism; uk; welfarestate

1 posted on 02/25/2010 3:31:57 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Scanian

O’Reilly is an idiot. He really is. Blowhard and idiot. He almost makes me cringe sometimes when he’s talking to somebody with real brains such as Brit Hume, Charles Krauthammer or Karl Rove. He doesn’t have the command of facts and detail he needs to be discussing about half of what he talks about. Also, interrupting his guests is just out of control. And then there’s Mark Lamont Hill. Puhleeze, what a clown.


2 posted on 02/25/2010 3:40:52 AM PST by chilltherats (First, kill all the lawyers (now that they ARE the tyrants).......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian
I haven't watched O'Reilly in years, but if this is true it just adds to the list of reasons to avoid him.

Obama's socialism is bad enough, but people who so describe him never take it to where Obama really is on the continuum. He's a fascist.

Adam Shaw says Obama is 'well spoken.' At least he didn't say eloquent. I suppose in some macabre way a man can be 'well spoken' and still make his listener's skin crawl. I have a hard time with 'eloquent' in that context.

3 posted on 02/25/2010 3:47:11 AM PST by stevem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chilltherats
BOR has lost his street creds with the conservative community. He's so full of himself that his smugness has become nauseating.
4 posted on 02/25/2010 3:47:14 AM PST by RU88 (Bow to no man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RU88

Obma is a Socialist and Bill O’ Reilly is full of crap.


5 posted on 02/25/2010 3:49:19 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

The problem with O’Reilly is that he defines himself as being a contrarian. Will always try to take an opposing view.


6 posted on 02/25/2010 3:57:35 AM PST by AdaGray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Scanian
Socialism is defined as an economic system under which the government owns the means of production.

In the past year and a half, the government has nationalized banks and 2 major car companies. Currently the government is trying to do the same to the health care industry. That pretty much fits the textbook description of socialism.

7 posted on 02/25/2010 4:04:20 AM PST by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chilltherats

BOR goes on & on & on....I don’t know how Charles K, Rove & Hume keep their composure.


8 posted on 02/25/2010 4:05:24 AM PST by FES0844
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AdaGray

He is a liar. He knows Obama is a Socialist and pretends he does not. He acts stupid. His whole shtick is an act.


9 posted on 02/25/2010 4:05:36 AM PST by screaminsunshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

O’Reilly is so ridiculous. Obama catered to his ego and that was all it took for O’Reilly to be his champion.

I truly cannot stand that man. Well, either of them for that matter.


10 posted on 02/25/2010 4:05:55 AM PST by autumnraine (You can't fix stupid, but you can vote it out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chilltherats

O’Reilly is the right’s version of Biden. He is convinced of his supreme intelligence and doesn’t realize how much a moron he looks like when talking to people with REAL intelligence.


11 posted on 02/25/2010 4:13:49 AM PST by autumnraine (You can't fix stupid, but you can vote it out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Scanian
"Black Liberation" revolutionary communist Marc Lamont Hill on O'Reilly again

Posted on Tuesday, February 23, 2010 8:36:33 PM by ETL

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2457920/posts

12 posted on 02/25/2010 4:16:58 AM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FES0844

Very often you can tell that they’re just tolerating him, especially Brit and Charles. Rove seems to indulge in and engage him a small bit more.


13 posted on 02/25/2010 4:21:01 AM PST by chilltherats (First, kill all the lawyers (now that they ARE the tyrants).......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

Simply state POTUS Obama is indeed a socialist and it woul;d take very little movement on his part to become a intolerant dictator.


14 posted on 02/25/2010 4:23:00 AM PST by JLAGRAYFOX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FES0844
BOR goes on & on & on....I don’t know how Charles K, Rove & Hume keep their composure.

The only reason that I can fathom about how Bill O'R keeps his super ratings is that his show is filled with luminaries like Rove, Charles and Brit on an almost nightly basis. And I suspect the only reason these luminaries go on a put up with O'R is that he has these great ratings. I guess it's a formula that works for now.

15 posted on 02/25/2010 4:25:14 AM PST by ReleaseTheHounds ("The demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RU88
He's so full of himself that his smugness has become nauseating.

BOR is as much a narcissist as Obama. Nausea is definitely what I get if I listen to him for more than 5 minutes.

16 posted on 02/25/2010 4:36:11 AM PST by IamConservative (Liberty is all a good man needs to succeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: IamConservative
BOR definition of socalism ,did they governemnt take your private property.

What a joke, ask BOR ,even before Obama ow many times do you pay for you house?

17 posted on 02/25/2010 4:56:50 AM PST by scooby321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine

He, himself, is almost unwatchable. He does get some important stories, though. We DVR hi s show so we can skim through it and pick out what we want to watch.


18 posted on 02/25/2010 4:58:25 AM PST by chilltherats (First, kill all the lawyers (now that they ARE the tyrants).......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FES0844

He lectures them, which is laughable. Strangely, they seen slightly bemused by him..I’t s easy to see they don’t take him seriously and likely consider him a blowhard or at least a bit of a charlatan or showman.


19 posted on 02/25/2010 5:02:22 AM PST by chilltherats (First, kill all the lawyers (now that they ARE the tyrants).......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: chilltherats

I would love to see Rush and O’Riley in a face-to-face. I might even buy a television to watch it. It doesn’t have to be a debate, just an interview of one by the other or a “discussion.” Perhaps I am guilty of wishing disaster on someone but, so be it.


20 posted on 02/25/2010 5:18:01 AM PST by arthurus ("If you don't believe in shooting abortionists, don't shoot an abortionist." -Ann C.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: autumnraine

You are absolutely right. Zer0 agreed to go on O’Reilly’s show during the campaign, which evidently got Billy good ratings that night, and he has been sucking up to Zer0 ever since.

Billy is clearly dying to get another interview with him, as if the viewing public hasn’t seen Elephant Ears enough already. Having him on in 2008 was much different than having him on in 2010, now that we’ve all had a bellyfull of him.


21 posted on 02/25/2010 5:19:14 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: chilltherats; WilliamofCarmichael
"O’Reilly is an idiot. He really is. Blowhard and idiot. He almost makes me cringe sometimes when he’s talking to somebody with real brains such as Brit Hume, Charles Krauthammer or Karl Rove. He doesn’t have the command of facts and detail he needs to be discussing about half of what he talks about.."

Exactly. But then neither do the biggest portion of his viewers so he gets away with it.

He is also very petty and vindictive as a result of his extremely thin skin. Here's merely one, out of many instances, that can be cited:

"As I recall what brought Bill O'Reilly to say that someone should kill Matt Drudge shows exactly how petty Mr. O'Reilly can be.

"Drudge had posted the news that O'Reilly was starting a radio show and it was believed that O'Reilly thought that he could take on and defeat Rush.

"O'Reilly denied that he was starting a radio show.

"Drudge persisted even stating that O'Reilly was paying stations to take his show.

"For days O'REilly had some pretty nasty (hateful?) things to say about Drudge -- then there was that Imus show statement that someone should kill Matt Drudge. O'Reilly's emphasis.

"Shortly after that he started his radio show."

288 posted on 08/01/2007 10:13:46 PM EDT by WilliamofCarmichael

22 posted on 02/25/2010 5:23:03 AM PST by Matchett-PI (Sowell's book, Intellectuals and Society, eviscerates the fantasies that uphold leftist thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ETL

Can you imagine how Hill must talk about O’Reilly when he is around the rest of his commie crowd?

Billy is letting himself be used as a tool. Maybe at his income level you don’t care about such things but to me it is a sickening embarassment.


23 posted on 02/25/2010 5:24:01 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RU88
He's so full of himself that his smugness has become nauseating.


Whenever a bit on pop culture comes up he either pretends he does not know the reference or really does not know the reference. I am not sure which it is, but either way, it distances himself from his audience.

I watch The Factor because of Bill but in spite of him. They do have some great guest and I really love the Miller Time.

24 posted on 02/25/2010 5:28:11 AM PST by CIB-173RDABN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JLAGRAYFOX

I realize I am an extreme paranoid but I believe in my heart that when he took office Zer0 had every intention of socializing the country by hook or by crook and make himself a Chavez-style quasi-dictator. It was only public outrage that forced him to cool his jets a bit. This time last year we were talking about brown shirts and Americorps being used as an American SA based on remarks by Rahm Emanuel. Nowadays, we don’t hear much about such Obot programs being developed. The tea parties and town halls made any such ideas like seem politically impracticable.


25 posted on 02/25/2010 5:31:05 AM PST by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Scanian

And think about all the important things he COULD be doing, such as linking MLH’s “Black Liberation” revolutionary communism to Obama and Reverend Wright’s. Even Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground advocated “Black Liberation”. Of course they didn’t do it through some concocted phony ‘religion’ like “Black Liberation Theology” like Rev Wright and Screwy Louie Farrakhan does. The so-called “Nation of Islam” is another Black Liberation Theology revolutionary communist front movement. Farrakhan’s great vision is to establish a Maoist system here in the U.S. with various “ministries” controlling specific areas of our lives, much like what Obama is attempting to do with all of his “Czars”. Much more on all this on my FR Home page.


26 posted on 02/25/2010 5:36:19 AM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ETL

O’Reilly made a jackass out of himself again this morning:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/02/oreilly-for-president-i-mave-more-power-doing-what-im-doing.html


27 posted on 02/25/2010 6:20:14 AM PST by Matchett-PI (Sowell's book, Intellectuals and Society, eviscerates the fantasies that uphold leftist thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI

Thanks. I’ll check it out.


28 posted on 02/25/2010 6:24:35 AM PST by ETL (ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Scanian; Lando Lincoln; neverdem; SJackson; dennisw; NonValueAdded; Alouette; .cnI redruM; Valin; ..
Adam Shaw:
... There are as many exact definitions of socialism as there are socialists. Yet they do have 
common characteristics. Love of big government, nationalization of industry, massive 
taxation, wealth redistribution, etc. all point towards socialism. Someone like the president 
would not even have to say he was a socialist in Western Europe; it would be assumed quite 
normally, without any fuss or conspiracy.
I have a lot of respect for Bill O'Reilly, but to a Brit who has seen his fair share of socialists and 
lives in a socialist country run by a self-described socialist party by a self-described socialist 
prime minister who has taken over for another self-described socialist prime minister, it is 
puzzling why self-described independents like Mr O'Reilly are doing backflips in an attempt 
to avoid the obvious fact -- President Obama is quite clearly a socialist.
All these verbal gymnastics that are used to avoid stating the obvious may be rather humorous for 
someone watching from over the Atlantic, but for Americans, such delusion is a very serious matter. 
It is important, not just for the American right, but for the American people as a whole, to realise just 
exactly who it is they have elected to office. With the approval numbers dropping almost daily for 
the president, it appears that it is sinking in for the generally center-right American public.  
However, when people on the right start being "concerned" about describing Obama as what he clearly 
is, in part due to the hysteria that both sides of the political spectrum exhibit when the word "socialist" 
is used, then it damages the effectiveness of opposition to him. Instead of being able to define what 
Obama's aims are in his presidency, those on the left and on the right keep pushing Obama into a slightly 
left-of-center, non-ideological fog. Such a political move is deceitful, and it does not allow the American 
public to get a clear perception of just what they have voted into the White House.
Those of us across the pond who analyze American politics know exactly who it is you have in the White 
House. Obama is not some new post-political entity. Nor is he some form of Stalinist that will set up a 
USSA. He is a normal, well-spoken, charismatic socialist who in Britain would sit quite happily towards 
the left of the Labour Party alongside figures such as Tony Benn, Aneurin Bevan, Harold Wilson, and Ed 
Balls. To call someone a socialist is not conspiratorial, and it is not fear-mongering; it is simply the truth, and 
it is time for some in the conservative media to take a deep breath and admit it -- America has a socialist 
leading the country. 
Welcome to the club: It stinks!

Nailed It!

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.)

I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention.

You are welcome to browse the list of truly exceptional articles I pinged to lately. Updated on January 13, 2010.  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about).

Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

 


29 posted on 02/25/2010 6:48:45 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI
Drudge would sometimes playback O'Reilly's "someone should kill Matt Drudge" comments as a lead-in to his (Drudge's) Sunday night live radio show. WLW's (Cincinnati) Bill Cunningham now does the show.

I do not have a TV and have never seen O'Reilly's show. I used to listen to his radio show but I stopped listening when O'Reilly trashed Viet Nam war veterans opposing Kerry to curry favor with Kerry -- O'Reilly wanted Kerry on his TV/radio shows and, post election, stated that he and Kerry were friends.

No spin? My gosh O'Reilly's a whirling dervish!

30 posted on 02/25/2010 9:55:54 AM PST by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: WilliamofCarmichael
Anyone who cares too much about what others think of him can never be trusted until he grows up and becomes emotionally stable.

That's my biggest problem with O'Reilly. He is waaaaaaaaaay too thin-skinned, has a hard time accepting any criticism, and as a result is very defensive, petty and vindictive.

31 posted on 02/25/2010 10:52:21 AM PST by Matchett-PI (Sowell's book, Intellectuals and Society, eviscerates the fantasies that uphold leftist thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Tolik

BTTT


32 posted on 02/25/2010 11:17:30 AM PST by spodefly (I have posted nothing but BTTT over 1000 times!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Tolik

tolik - you’re missed. When are you coming back?


33 posted on 07/04/2010 7:22:56 PM PDT by GOPJ (There is nothing unexpected about the failure of socialism/communism.freeper pieceofthepuzzle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson