Monday, August 31, 2015

The Left will nominate a Socialist

Whether Hillary Clinton survives her current email-gate woes, or if Joe Biden jumps into the race, or even the grouchy, curmudgeonly Bernie Sanders prevails, liberals will have no choice this time around but to run on socialism.

We all know that Obama is a dyed-in-the-wool, dues paying avowed socialist, and accordingly so is his second banana.  Joe Biden will lead the country down the road to ruin and bankruptcy with at least another four years of sour economic policies that punish achievers with ever increasing taxes, and then turn around and hand out freebies to an ever increasing dependent constituency.

Hillary, with absolutely no doubt, is a raging socialist in her own right, and will wage a war on capitalism with a purple vengeance and wreak virtual havoc on an already downtrodden economy if (God help us) elected as President of the United States of America.

The only honest socialist in the bunch (if that is even possible) would be Bernie Sanders.  He is openly and unapologetically a practicing card-carrying Socialist, with a Capital "S."  Of course he hates the meanness and unfairness of capitalism, and will ensure that not one American has a dime more than any other American: otherwise, things would be unfair.  

Running on the tenets of socialism is problematic for the Left. First and foremost, Americans don't like to think that they live in a socialist country.  They just don't.  I don't know why this is, because Americans sure elect a LOT of socialists to public office.  

Secondly, socialists/liberals still need a humming economy to generate enough taxes in order to re-distribute them from those who pay them to those who take them, and if they inflict full-blown high octane socialism into the economy, we will turn into Greece faster than a bottle of Scotch disappears within the Kennedy compound. And believe me, that's fast.  And accordingly, there go those taxes that were scheduled for re-distribution, right down the ol' crapper.

Uber-liberal journalist Chris Matthews asked Debbie Wasserman-Schultz a few weeks ago on "Hardball" if she could explain the difference between a Democrat and a socialist.  And Debbie, a true-believer in all things socialist, could not come up with a single difference.  Not one.  But this is not what Democrats want to convey if they want to win in November, 2016.  Of course they want things to BE socialist, but they would never succeed in CALLING their philosophy and policies socialist.

It must be tough to be a Democrat these days.  


Kid said...

The beast - just die you bitch
Sanders - another obama
Biden - at least there will be plenty of laughs.

Ed Bonderenka said...

"It must be tough to be a Democrat these days."
With the idiots voting these days?
They'd vote for Marvin the Martian as he pointed a raygun at their head just to vote the first martian in to office.

Fredd said...

Ed: yes, the Dems have the idiots in their back pockets.

But there are still a whole lot of people who still go to work in the US. Not as many as before, but still there's a lot of them. It's THOSE folk who will be looking at the Democrats with a jaundiced eye this time around.

LL said...

The only people that the Democrats have running are socialists. And when you think about it, the people who vote Democrat are socialists because most of them have either a grievance (select one or more from a long list of potentials) or they want to keep the gravy train of free cheese, Obamaphones, food stamps, welfare, subsidized rent or other benefits coming. You have to face the facts that the taste of bread earned by other men is sweet to Democrats.

Z said...

Excellent post, Fredd....Imagine AMERICANS even thinking of voting for a SOCIALIST? It's so antithetical, but we have to know it isn't anymore, that our kids are indoctrinated pretty darned hard.
A renown socialist, Norman Thomas, I think his name is, has a public school named after him in NYC. I thought it was a joke, about 8 years ago, so I literally called the school in NYC and asked if the school was public, and she said "Yes we are!"
WOW...but there's good news, unless the 'small schools' are of the same ilk...I found this when I just Googled:
"Norman Thomas closed in June 2014, replaced by small schools in the building. For your transcript or proof of graduation from Norman Thomas, call the Education Department at (718) 935-2399 or (718) 935-2009."!!

Fredd said...

LL: yes, socialists are now under every rock in the US. They just don't like to be called socialists.

But most of those under-rock dwelling socialists can't stand capitalism, either. We should just call them what they are: parasites.

Fredd said...


I have never heard of Norman Thomas, but I suppose that's what Google is for. George Lincoln Rockwell, now, I've heard of him, the former American Commie Czar.

I've never actually understood fully the difference between socialism and communism, since the end results of both are the same. I tend to lump them both into the same category: unacceptable philosophies that have failed every time they have been tried, ever, and for the same reason: free riders will eventually topple the system.

Z said...

fredd, I totally get your conundrum of Socialism v Communism...I always think of Communism as Socialism on Steroids........
What makes me laugh is leftwingers who hang out at some of our blogs and don't think Obama's a socialist :-) REDISTRIBUTION isn't SOCIALISM!? REALLY?

LL said...

It's interesting to see H. R. Clinton squirm as her server guy takes the 5th and the death of a thousand cuts comes to her because of her lies and deceptions. She's one socialist that I will be happy to see gone from the political scene -- irrespective of which rock she crawls under. I think that exiling her to one of her Arab Spring success story countries would be appropriate. She can take Bill with her.

Ed Bonderenka said...

Fredd: George Lincoln Rockwell was an American Nazi.
LL: I saw a photo today with Hillary saying If you wouldn't ask so many questions, I wouldn't have to lie so much!