I’m a conservative.
A federalist.
A constitutionalist.
I believe the purpose of government, both state and federal, is primarily to protect the liberty of individuals.
Obama is the antithesis of these ideas. He boldy proclaims that healthcare should be a right and that wealth is a product of “luck” and needs to be spread around.
He is the most pro-choice senator in the United States Senate and opposed legislation that would make healthcare for babies who survive abortions mandatory.
He believes that governments create jobs. He believes our progressive tax system isn’t progressive enough.
He believes the solution to our 2/3 dependence on foreign oil is cutting our consumption by 2/3. How? By limiting what consumers can buy and what producers can produce.
He believes that corporations are evil and their profits are “inappropriate”. He would impose “windfall taxes” to correct this inequity.
He worked with communists like Bill Ayers, whose education ideas include the discouragement of patriotism to country and the encouragement of allegiance to the world.
And, he has literally come from “nowhere”. He’s a junior senator with only 173 working days in the senate. We can only guess what he will do with the office of the presidency.
So, I ask: In what substantive way do Barack Obama’s views differ from that of Karl Marx and his followers?
It would be foolish to assume that the days of Marxism and its subversive techniques of achieving power are long gone.
It would also be foolish to assume that the next Marxist leader will gain power by proclaiming himself to be a Marxist.
Barack Obama scares me.
#1 by Shanna at October 17th, 2008
I enjoyed that Clifton and agree with you wholeheartedly. It is unfortunate that the only other choice we have is McCain and his joke of a VP Palin.
#2 by Lauren Hoessly at October 20th, 2008
thank you for writing this
#3 by From abroad at October 24th, 2008
I’m from a far away country, but i’m a journalist and therefore someone who’s interested in whats happening over there.
To tell you the truth the sentence “He boldy proclaims that healthcare should be a right” is absolutly sureal to me (and to 99% of us europeans).
Do you really think that healthcare shouldn’t be a right? I mean, aren’t we trying to make this planet better?
#4 by clifgriffin at October 25th, 2008
That’s a fair question. The issue of healthcare and the best way to provide it for everyone (and not just the rich) is a huge one.
There are many many problems with the current system that will absolutely be made worse if we declare blanketly that healthcare is the responsibility of the government to provide for all citizens.
First, over regulation of the medical field has made the bar for entry so high that only an elite few are able to become doctors, nurses, etc. Which, while this increases the quality of health care, it also increases the cost. (Supply and demand) Gone are the days of country doctors.
I’m not against regulation, but, it is one of the reasons the costs are high.
Second, almost no one is paying for their healthcare directly. The majority of people have some type of insurance plan through their work or even personal policies. And, the poor frequent emergency rooms as they are legally bound to provide care. In either case, when someone else is paying the cost will always be higher.
As to whether it is a right, we have to honestly assess what rights are. Just because something is good doesn’t mean we’re entitled to it. Being wealthy has its benefits, but not all can be wealthy. Being able to afford expensive, healthy foods is nice, but not all can afford them. Having a car is nice…but it isn’t a right. Owning a home is nice, but it likewise isn’t a right.
Up until modern times, the idea of healthcare being universal and an entitlement was foreign. If you got cancer, you died…end of story. No one sued anyone else for wrongful death.
The advent of the ability to treat conditions and increase the quality of life has brought something unexpected…the idea that all, regardless of ability to pay, should have this luxury.
Now, I don’t want to sound cold and heartless here. In no way am I advocating a system where only the wealthy can afford healthcare. I also don’t want to suggest that we should leave things as they are.
Healthcare is in crisis in this country because of over regulation by government on nearly every level. I don’t have the perfect solution, but I know that the best direction to head in involves the free market (which tends to push prices down) and personal responsibility. It should also be state run as state governments tend to be much more sensitive to the will of the people. It also would account for the fact that the healthcare situation varies from location to location.
The founders of this nation would have laughed at the idea that the federal government provide such things. It simply isn’t the role of government to do so…protecting the liberty of individuals is the first and most important obligation. Anything else should be handled by the people.
#5 by Steve at October 26th, 2008
You could at least spell his name right :/
#6 by clifgriffin at October 26th, 2008
Good catch.
#7 by Kjetil at October 26th, 2008
Obama is a strong right wing conservative! To claim that he is anything like Marx is crazy.
Come to Europe and I’ll show you left wing. Here in Norway, even the most conservative right wing US-lovers are left for Obama.And just if you didn’t know, Most countries here are way better off than US. Norway is approximately 1000 times better in any way.
You should go out more, don’t just sit in your basement and polarize with your closest friends. Open up a bit! Geez.
#8 by clifgriffin at October 26th, 2008
Kjetil, thanks for your feedback.
Obama may be many things, but conservative he is not. You are officially the only person I have heard ascribe conservatism to him. Certainly no credible political scholars have.
To be fair, neither is McCain, but that is another issue all together.
He may seem to be more conservative than the average European citizen/politician, but that really remains to be seen.
In terms of the direction he would take this country…he is very possibly the most liberal candidate the US has ever had for the office of president.
You need to qualify your statement that “most countries here are way better of than US”. In what category? It can’t be economics. It can’t be cost of living. It can’t be general prosperity. It can’t be in personal freedoms.
It could be in health care, but even that’s very debatable.
Here’s a hint: Not very many US citizens, regardless of political affiliation, want the US system to emulate European ones.
As far as my exposure to other ideas…you don’t know me, so, that is probably a premature conclusion.
#9 by Kjetil at October 26th, 2008
In all categories. Healthcare, Education, Freedom, Prosperity, Economics and all the categories you can name.
I know that a lot of people in the US don’t want to go in the direction scandinavian and european countries have, but that’s most likely because they never go out of the country themselves. The people who travel a lot, often from the bigger cities in the US, they already vote Obama. I’m free as a bird in Norway, and don’t tell me that I’m not just because I can’t own a gun – since we don’t have as much guns in Norway, I’m free to move freely in all dark alleys in as well without even thinking about getting mugged. And we are also free to take abortion as we like, and free to get whatever education I want (I get paid to go to school), and free to get whatever job I want (1% unemployment rate).
I could start giving you arguments, but I really don’t think I can convince you to anything myself, you have to figure it out for yourself. If you start discussing with leftwings and not just mingle with your conservative friends, maybe you will change your view on europeans. That is left to see.
#10 by clifgriffin at October 27th, 2008
What about size?
#11 by Kjetil at October 28th, 2008
European countries are better in size as well. Biggest isn’t always best.
#12 by clifgriffin at October 28th, 2008
Fair enough.
Well Kjetil, I don’t know how to respond to your rhetoric as unfortunately, your pro-Norway/all-things-not-USA bias seems stronger than my pro-American bias.
Freedom has always defined America. That sounds cliche, but it’s true. We have always favored personal liberty over parental over sight as much as possible.
Once you add entitlements to “equalize” economic injustice, the system starts to break down.
Western Europe is the 2nd richest place to live in the world. Yet, an American living under the poverty line is more likely to have a telephone, television, air conditioning, an automobile than the average person in Western Europe. They eat more meat, are more likely to own their own home and even have a greater amount of living space on average.
The idea of their being widespread poverty and neglect in America is simply a lie…if you are poor in America and continue to be poor, you are making bad decisions. It’s as simple as that.
Now, granted, there are some who cannot help themselves, and we help them. If you have a severe disability, we offer disability coverage. If you can’t afford food, you can get food stamps. If you can’t afford a house, we offer government housing.
What Barack Obama and his cronies want to do is to take money away from the so-called rich and give it to the so-called poor. He adheres to the Marxist idea that we take “from each according to his ability” and give to “each according to their need”.
Capitalism is not evil, it’s based solely on performance. If you work hard, you will succeed. If you don’t, you won’t. Socialism says that if someone is failing while another succeeds, it is society’s fault and responsibility.
Socialism says that if two businesses are on opposite sides of the street and one is succeeding and the other is failing, you should take from the successful one and give to the failing one.
Capitalism is based on the idea that business fail because they are doing something wrong and need to fail. To say otherwise is (in my opinion) morally wrong and (in fact) completely against the principles this nation was founded upon.
And, if you need more evidence that America’s system is working, just consider that with about 5% of the world’s population, we are producing 20% of the world’s GDP.
#13 by Kjetil at October 29th, 2008
Haha! Oh well. My comments:
““equalize” economic injustice”, well mccain wants to tax the rich more than the poor as well, just not as much. How do you explain that?
“the system breaks down”? Norway is five thousand miles left for the US, and it is not “breaking down”. Stop saying that from now on, it is wrong.
Here we don’t need automobiles here, it is polluting and bad for the environment. we have public transportation (and fresh air), controlled by the state.
I have no idea why you think telephone and TV matters when you live below the poverty line. It is also well known that Americans eat more of everything than the average european – that is not a good thing. A lot of meat is also bad for your health ( but maybe you don’t learn that over there yet).
I don’t know how big your houses and apartments are, but I do know that you have slums, with horrible housing and living conditions. Here you also find the “government housing” you are talking about. We don’t have that at all. The law here says that everyone has the right to a proper home.
Of course poor people makes bad decisions. This is often a result of bad parenting and/or poor education. But either way they need help. If they get help, they will stop being poor. We did that in Norway, but you apparently want them to continue be poor and have the worlds highest crime rates. If you are poor, have disability or out of work – you get paid a decent enough amount of money that you can live your life without getting a total breakdown. You might react on the “out of work”-part, and yes, there are a tiny fraction of the population that is lazy, and we pay for it. But it is just that, a tiny fraction, and it well worth it overall.
I also don’t know why you say “so called rich”. People earning over a million dollar each year is not “so called rich”. They are rich. The people that needs and recieves the money is not so called poor, they are poor. How can you you ever justify having schools that are as bad as some of yours? You do have better universities than us, but you also have some schools that are crappy as fuck. We don’t have those, noone deserves bad education.
I also believe capitalism is evil _as it is today_. This because people with gigantic sums of money have power, instead of the people we elect in democracy. That is not the way it is suppose to be. The 500 richest people on the earth have more capital than the 1.5 billion poorest. That is not the way it is suppose to be. The poor work just as hard as the rich.
I see you also bring in GDP as well, which is weird, since we are on top of the world ranking #2 on GDP per capita income, you are ranking #12, with _half_ of our GDP. Another thing is that we have the closest gap in the world between rich and poor (also having the most millionaires per capita), which means that if we take away the top 5% richest in each of our countries I bet we would rank around #9 maybe, and you will be probably be somewhere between Zimbabwe and Uganda. Not true of course, but you get the point. To use “we” on america when you mean “the 10% richest”, is very misleading.
Also, excuse my horrible English, this comment box is tiny so it’s hard to get an overview and correct my grammar.
#14 by clifgriffin at October 29th, 2008
You’re correct, McCain does favor a progressive tax as well. That doesn’t make it right. I’m not a huge McCain fan…I’m just a huge Obama opponent.
The system breaks down…our system. Not that a mix of socialism/capitalism cannot work, it is just opposed to the constitutional principles on which this country was founded. Our constitution is founded on limited government AND personal responsibility.
You are correct that the GDP is not alone a sufficient indicator of American success, but the point I was trying to make stands…we produce more than anyone else per capita than anyone in the world.
GDP per capita is the GDP divided by the labor force. Under socialism, the GDP has to be divided by the entire population as everyone is being provided for. So, while you have have more money per laborer statistically, each laborer is able to use far less of their money.
http://www.il-ireland.com/il/qofl2008/
As you can see from this data, the US currently stands at number 3 in terms of Quality of Life. Norway? 11.
When you add in the fact that Norway is roughly the size of New Hampshire and has a tiny fraction of our population, it becomes difficult to make good comparisons. Socialism has always proven difficult to scale. The more people, the less efficient it is and the more problems you have.
Morally speaking, it is always better to let people earn their money and use that money to earn more money, pay workers, provide for their families, etc. Once you decide what an acceptable wage is and start distributing that money evenly among the population, you lose the incentive to succeed. You lose the incentive to donate to those in need (which Americans do more per capita than any other country).
Capitalism gives power to the people everytime. The wealthy get their power from consumers who vote for or against them with their dollars. If everyone stopped shopping at Walmart tomorrow, they wouldn’t last a week.
The essential point of my post was that Obama is a Marxist and intends to implement socialism as found in France, Sweeden, and Norway in the US. My assumption is that a) Marxism doesn’t work b) Marxism is unconstitutional. c) Americans do not want socialism.
Your point seems to be simultaneously that Obama is not a Marxist, but also that Marxism is right.
#15 by Kjetil at October 29th, 2008
It’s amazing that people like you even exist. Travel a roundtrip in Scandinavia or read up on it before saying it is worse than the US. Especially on freedom and quality of life. For everyone outside of Europe that has a bit knowledge about scandinavia and europe, and the whole of Europe, it is 100% clear how great the nordic model we use is working. Europe is leaning towards it as best they can. You are considering both, but we are not at all doing that – Mccain and your “free” capitalism isn’t even an option. It’s black and white.
http://www.economist.com/vote2008/
I think you maybe should rethink your ideas and maybe acknowledge the fact that you might be wrong and _the rest of the world_ are right.
#16 by clifgriffin at October 29th, 2008
I can see that continuing this exchange will be useless. You seem more interested in blind hatred of the US and an overactive sense of patriotism than using actual facts.
Thanks for commenting though.
#17 by olivier at November 4th, 2008
well clif sorry to have to say that but the last days are definitely against your opinion capitalism is all good. This stupid games bankers have played for a few weeks have already knocked down entire countries, damaged and ruined millions’ people expectations and real lives, and lot of troubles are still awaiting to come. Just because of U.S. crooks selling junk as gold, encouraged by your governants. This so naive view of yours that liberty = dollar = happyness for all those wanting is just a lie and you know it, if not you will learn it soonly. Capitalism is based under lowering costs and/for magnifying profits, which always goes to very bad things : over-exploitation and destruction (soils, waters, animals, humans,…) and whenever possible, wars. Who pays for that ? As you said, you. And me and everybody. Unfortunately what you do not say, ignore or just refuse to see is that you, Clif, you do not pay the real cost of all this mess because you do live in a rich country AND have a decent job AND have some state guaranteed rights AND have a controlled army AND AND AND… The ancient victims of capitalism would hate you for ignoring them, you a so-called christian, would they not being already dead. The current ones would hate you being so selfisch, would they not struggling for their own life or family. The next to drown already hate you for you accusing them not having the arms to fight the disasters to come. Capitalism ? Instead of being a wonderful tool for bringing humanity to the best as it could be, it’s just the better way a very few ones have confiscated to enslave the rest of humanity and you clearly are their self-wanting manipulated spokesman. Clap clap clap
#18 by clifgriffin at November 4th, 2008
Olivier,
The countries with the most general prosperity are those operating within the realm of capitalism. Yes, even socialist countries are surviving because…at some level…capitalist principles are keeping their markets competitive.
Your argument is so poor it reaches absurdity. What you describe…the rich enslaving the poor is *exactly* what capitalism and free market economics have *saved* much of the world from. Ever heard of the feudal system? Ever heard of the cast system? Ever read about the extreme poverty of the people living in communist countries under the USSR?
Your IP reveals that you live in France. Congratulations! You live in a socialist experiment that is literally being propped up by the capitalist economic system. (You’re welcome.)
You arrogant Europeans sit in the shade of the the tent of capitalism, sipping margaritas, while cursing the tent and saying that your corner of the tent is better than the whole tent because you get free health care.
But, fortunately, exchanges like this reassure me that it isn’t just average American citizens that are willingly ignorant. No, it’s the average world citizen.
*sigh*
#19 by Olivier at November 5th, 2008
So here we come ! Yes I have heard of feudal system, and I cannot see any difference; barons of finance, captains of industry, kings of burgers, princes of entertainment are exactly the same ones that in this times: sad little pricks with so poor lives and aspirations and so much fears in them that they need to treasure million more times money they need to decently live when beside them are millions of people hungry. They just moved the “land monopoly” to the “money monopoly”, I cannot see any progress in it, that’s the same old game : mine is bigger than yours…
Let me tell you your reply is in itself full of ignorance and your blindness only comes from your lack of global vision. Chinese are communists which doesn’t impeach them being the world’s richer bankers. And can you tell me why ? As a result of occidental “pure” liberalism, employement in north america and europe is agonizing and hundred of thousand of people are getting poorer and poorer. Is this because of their failure ? No no no, it’s the result of capitalism and of the way the financial caste force to change rules without any limits and faster than society can absorb them, with the benediction of politics and already rich people prefering live their last days in Tampa, Florida than in Mobile, Alabama (which I personnally can’t blame).
As a capitalist, do you see any reason states should save today bankers who were defying them yesterday ? If the market is so pure, why do they not accept being bought by tank fuelled raiders, as they always have done to other unfortunates before ?
Taking the christians words, capitalism AS IT IS TODAY is just another golden calf, get the perverted capitalists out of the temple and now !!!
And FYI I’m not a socialist, but if this makes you happy, all cheers.
#20 by clifgriffin at November 6th, 2008
1. The middle class is a new thing in history. It is the child of capitalism.
2. There is nothing morally wrong with being wealthy. (I think you would agree.)
3. While some are greedy and do not give of their excess to those with less, they are still entitled to what they have rightfully earned.
4. The rich in this country pay nearly all of the taxes. The top 1% pay 50%. The top 20% pay 80%.
5. The wealthy create jobs in this country. They invest and expand and hire more employees.
6. If you are poor in this country, you have options. You can get food stamps and welfare. (Not to mention the many many many charities out there.)
7. If you work hard, you will succeed.
8. If you don’t, you won’t.
9. You, at the end of the day, are responsible for your own destiny.
As a member of the lower end of the middle class, I think I am not being hypocritical in saying any of this. My success comes from my labor and nothing else.
There are some immoral actions on the part of others that it would be immoral to legislate against because it encroaches the liberty of others. It may be immoral to lie to your spouse, but we can’t make a law against it. It may be wrong to make money and then sit on it and refuse to share your gains with the poor, but we can’t rightfully take it away.
Thanks for commenting. I appreciate your concern with the state of the world, but I think you should focus your solution on changing people, rather than trying to equalize inequity through the growth of government.
#21 by Austin Cook at July 19th, 2010
Food Stamps are great and i wish that there were more of them.-:”