Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Obama On Redistributing Wealth
Posted by: MichaelW on Sunday, October 26, 2008

This is from an interview Barack Obama did in 2001 when he was an Illinois State Senator [HT: Vinnie]:

Can someone tell me again how Obama's not a socialist with a radical agenda? Because Obama sure seems to think he is.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

That was taken out of context. By context, I mean it was an NPR interview, and everyone knows you have to appear socialist to appeal to them, but after the election that sort of nonsense is all dropped. Goolsbee told me so.
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
It’s October, it must be ... SURPRISE!

Major Redistributive Change?!? Srsly?
Written By: Ronnie Gipper
The American electorate knows Senator Obama’s socialist views, and will elect him anyway. The electorate knows that one party in charge of all three branches of power is problematical to say the least—as the Republicans proved—but they are going to award governance over all three branches to one political party again, nonetheless. Keynsian economics is about to take hold of fiscal policy in an Obama administration, but the electorate sees the market meltdown and simply wonders: Nothing could be worse than this, so why not bring back "make-work" Keynes?

Election Day will be a time for congratulating political conservatives for their eight-year embrace of K Street financing, big-government programs, "compassion" in the federal budget process, fighting two wars simultaneously to non-conclusion, and especially, their arrogance that they had invented the formula for a permanent political majority.

What will the proto-socialist President Obama launch in his Inaugural Address? Another ’New Deal’? Another ’Great Society’? How about, ’Progressive Reformation’?

The Great Depression smashed conservatism ideology for twenty years; too bad libertarian philosophy will experience much the same thing under a ’socialist’ President Obama. Unfortunately for all socialist nations in the world, they all fall into the bottom ranks by measures of prosperity and human freedom. Only eight long quasi-socialist years ahead, or twenty?

"Say, mister, canya spare a dime"?

Written By: a Duoist
Any chance the people might give the dems the presidency, yet keep the republican filibuster? Any chance?
Written By: josh b
URL: http://
Josh, I put that at the same odds of a Snowball surviving in Hell, or me waking up tomorrow morning and finding a "sated" Megan Fox in my bed...
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
I would walk in to find a "sated" Megan Fox in my bed...

... just that her boyfriend would be there too.

This is where tolerating the RINOs has screwed Republicans. Not only do the Democrats claim Bush & Republicans had Absolute Power for his 8 years (they even forget the past two years), they will have a filibuster proof majority much of the time, even though on paper it won’t seem that way.
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
I’m unclear on this. Do I have to be black to get some of that redistribution? ’cuz if I don’t, I sure want to find out how I can be a spreadee rather than a spreader. But if I do, I’m not down with this redistribution stuff at all.
Written By: Diffus
URL: http://
This is stunning. A major find. Incontrovertible in his own words from his own mouth proof of his notion that government should be used as a bludgeon to beat the wealth out of those who have it of behalf of those who want it.

Maybe there are some heretofore undecided people who’ll refrain from voting for him because of this.

But most of his supporters will probably be pleased to hear him lay it out so clearly.

Lots and lots of people want any and every dime government can beat out of somebody else and are thrilled to vote for someone who’ll promise to throw a little more change their way.

What are those wealthiest 5% doing with so much money to begin with? They must have stolen it somehow from The People and now thank goodness Barack is going to get it back. [/sarcasm]
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
The American electorate knows Senator Obama’s socialist views, and will elect him anyway.
Because most people who support Obama don’t think his policies will impact them in any material way. They are deluded that the only people who will suffer are a bunch of millionaires who will have to pay a few more dollars in taxes.
Written By: the wolf
URL: http://
Between 32% and 40% of workers pay NO income tax at all. The majority of them actually has a negative income tax rate. If I wanted to be elected president, it would not be a bad strategy to promise them more free money, and free food, free healthcare, etc. They are a good head start toward an electoral majority.
Written By: Is
URL: http://
I still meet people who are voting to punish Bush. By God I swear these people don’t live in the same time/space continuum as I do. They only phase in just long enough to cast a ballot and then phase out of reality again.
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
@jpm100 -

I’m surprised more hay isn’t being made out of McCain vs. Bush, 2000. Honest to God, I understand party loyalty, but wouldn’t reminding people of how 2000 played out help?

Remember the Robert Smigel cartoon, "Fun with Real Audio" about McCain’s endorsement of Bush in ’04? More than a little disrespectful to McCain, but it makes the point.

McCain is not Bush!
Written By: Ronnie Gipper
we should get rid of everything socialist. medicare, socialsecurity, police, fire dept, public roads, public electric lines, public sewer systems, public schools, public universities, the military, the internet etc etc anything that governments fund with taxes to provide public services.
Written By: slntax
URL: http://
Maybe crack a dictionary there, sIntax.
Written By: Ronnie Gipper
I guess Sintax read Murray Rothbard and had an epiphany.
Written By: Bilwick
URL: http://
@Ronnie Gripper
I’m surprised more hay isn’t being made out of McCain vs. Bush, 2000. Honest to God, I understand party loyalty, but wouldn’t reminding people of how 2000 played out help?
The guys that ran the nasties in the Bush campaign against McCain are the same guys that are running the (nasty element) of the McCain campaign.
Written By: symptomless
URL: http://
@a Duoist
Unfortunately for all socialist nations in the world, they all fall into the bottom ranks by measures of prosperity and human freedom.
Whilst I agree with most of your comment (apart from the ability for Obama to enact a "make-work" policy: there’s nothing left in the pot!), do you have any evidence of the above statement?

Most of Western Europe are socialist nations and

Check out this article:
Since 1950, western Europe has offered its citizens the highest combined standards of human, civil and social rights in world history.

I think a lot of Americans hear the word Socialism and suddenly fear USSR, China and Cuba.
Written By: symptomless
URL: http://
The evidence is Obama’s socialized medecine plan and comments on wealth redistribution. Anyone educated on the subject clearly understands this. The problem people are overseeing in having America become a socialist society is that (besides the fact that socialism has been a proven inferior system of government for many years in many different places)the US has capitalism embedded in our culture.Everything we do from the minute we wake up until we go to sleep is a result of living in a capitalistic society. All Americans live their lives by this system of government and typically don’t realize the benefits because we are so used to it. Trying to change this to an extreme opposite wil be catostrophic and virtually impossible. It will only hinder our economic and cultural growth. The reason why our 2nd amendment is in the US constitution is for exactly this and people will be very violent if they feel their rights are being taken away (which is a side effect of socialism, people are only equal if they are forced to be). And they will have good reason to be violent.
Written By: JB
URL: http://
Socialism isn’t extreme.

You’re thinking of Communism.

Who pays for your street lights, your schools, roads and bridges etc.? Is it the govt via your taxes?
Written By: symptomless
URL: http://
First of all using tax money for bridges and socialism are completely different. funding for roads and bridges varies from state to state. For example in Virginia VDOT gets no funding from state or federal tax money and FDOT gets funding from turism. Schools obviously are not socialized after grade school and even then many grade schools are privatized. College is paid for by the students tuition not tax payer dollars and free money to students from the goverment for education varies on a case by case basis. Loans are paid back and not free also. You completely missed my point, I said socialim was the extreme opposite, not extreme in itself, which many people would disagree with.
Written By: JB
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks