VIDEO: On Hardball, I Explain Why Sarah Palin Is a Socialist
| Wed Oct. 22, 2008 8:05 PM PDT
Who's the most socialistic governor in the United States? You betcha--it's Sarah Palin. That's what I said on Hardball (video below). But before we got to a highfalutin' discussion about ideology and the campaign, Chris Matthews, conservative radio talk show host Heidi Harris, and I discussed the troubles of GOP Republican Michele Bachmann, who might lose her seat because she played Hardball last Friday and lost. Bachman calling Democrats "anti-American," Palin spending $150,000 on clothes (which I discussed earlier on MSNBC)--these days, for left-of-center pundits, it's as easy as shooting pit bulls in a barrel
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
Great Clip
It would seem that a fundamental meaning in regards to the role of government no longer exists in the US. Thanks to Joe McCarthy the word "socialism" can be used as a swearword, but when this word is used in the context of being "anti-American" then it is obvious why American foreign policy fails so miserably.
Canada, Japan, South Korea and the EU all have socialist societies. These societies form to a high degree our most critical partners in business and in our defense thus when Bachman makes her anti-liberal statements she is doing far more than slamming 100 million voters in the US but she is also slamming almost a billion people to whom our system of defense is 100% dependent upon. From this perspective Bachman ought to be investigated in relation to attitudes that can be provably shown to undermine or threaten our national security. We need France. We need Germany. We need Great Britain and we need our good friends in South Korea and Japan but also we will discover that we need Russia and we need China and we need India and Brazil and so on and they need us.
The overriding majority of the world has adopted socialist strategies in regards to welfare because they offer a higher degree of humanness to the society as a whole. If you are sick shouldn't it be a right to be cared for? Apparently Bachman says no. She thinks that a third of the American public deserves to die abandoned in a back alley?but by god she will scream she is Pro-life.
The major difficulty with Republican arguments is that they too are socialists?but that is what Bachman calls "un-American". Bachman calls wasting a trillion dollars on fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as pro-American. In other words Bachman who would not lift a finger to save a dying American from a sickness that required hospitalization to be cured (that f#cker can die) but she would willingly send American youths to die in some foreign country because the government there won't do for its people what she won't do for us?I have to admit I do not understand her argument?
To further expand the Republican argument: Why should a single penny go to the military? Why should a single penny go to the CIA or other socialist programs? The Iraq War is a socialist funded war. If Americans want to fight such wars then if we follow the privatization is best arguments then private companies would have to win the support of the government to get permission to invade and private investors would have to evaluate whether the return on the investment would be worth the risk?under such conditions would private business have wagered one trillion on Iraq? I think not but socialists like Michele Bachman think that taxpayer's money should be used on wars that provably weaken national security and undermine the image of the US globally. She thinks that American's ought to use a sizable chunk of the taxpayer's money to undermine the constitution via anti-American legislation such as the Patriot Act or the new FISA and has the gall to call those who would defend the constitution liberals, leftists and anti-Americans?she even goes so far as to claim that these people are "terrorists or terrorist sympathizers". Like what a bitch! Michele Bachman is that type of socialist who under more critical conditions would simply be labeled a fascist?she believes the purpose of government is essentially to serve the corporation which puts her in line together with Mussolini.
I am really glad that David Corn pointed out in a masterly way the obvious socialist aspects of Hockey Mom Palin (and agreeing that this is a good use of taxes and a good tax strategy). Really great work and thanks for doing what I think millions of Americans would have liked to do but aren't in a position to do?but you did it and kept your cool. Most Impressive young Padwan
Great Clip
It would seem that a fundamental meaning in regards to the role of government no longer exists in the US. Thanks to Joe McCarthy the word "socialism" can be used as a swearword, but when this word is used in the context of being "anti-American" then it is obvious why American foreign policy fails so miserably.
Canada, Japan, South Korea and the EU all have socialist societies. These societies form to a high degree our most critical partners in business and in our defense thus when Bachman makes her anti-liberal statements she is doing far more than slamming 100 million voters in the US but she is also slamming almost a billion people to whom our system of defense is 100% dependent upon. From this perspective Bachman ought to be investigated in relation to attitudes that can be provably shown to undermine or threaten our national security. We need France. We need Germany. We need Great Britain and we need our good friends in South Korea and Japan but also we will discover that we need Russia and we need China and we need India and Brazil and so on and they need us.
The overriding majority of the world has adopted socialist strategies in regards to welfare because they offer a higher degree of humanness to the society as a whole. If you are sick shouldn't it be a right to be cared for? Apparently Bachman says no. She thinks that a third of the American public deserves to die abandoned in a back alley?but by god she will scream she is Pro-life.
The major difficulty with Republican arguments is that they too are socialists?but that is what Bachman calls "un-American". Bachman calls wasting a trillion dollars on fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as pro-American. In other words Bachman who would not lift a finger to save a dying American from a sickness that required hospitalization to be cured (that f#cker can die) but she would willingly send American youths to die in some foreign country because the government there won't do for its people what she won't do for us?I have to admit I do not understand her argument?
To further expand the Republican argument: Why should a single penny go to the military? Why should a single penny go to the CIA or other socialist programs? The Iraq War is a socialist funded war. If Americans want to fight such wars then if we follow the privatization is best arguments then private companies would have to win the support of the government to get permission to invade and private investors would have to evaluate whether the return on the investment would be worth the risk?under such conditions would private business have wagered one trillion on Iraq? I think not but socialists like Michele Bachman think that taxpayer's money should be used on wars that provably weaken national security and undermine the image of the US globally. She thinks that American's ought to use a sizable chunk of the taxpayer's money to undermine the constitution via anti-American legislation such as the Patriot Act or the new FISA and has the gall to call those who would defend the constitution liberals, leftists and anti-Americans?she even goes so far as to claim that these people are "terrorists or terrorist sympathizers". Like what a bitch! Michele Bachman is that type of socialist who under more critical conditions would simply be labeled a fascist?she believes the purpose of government is essentially to serve the corporation which puts her in line together with Mussolini.
I am really glad that David Corn pointed out in a masterly way the obvious socialist aspects of Hockey Mom Palin (and agreeing that this is a good use of taxes and a good tax strategy). Really great work and thanks for doing what I think millions of Americans would have liked to do but aren't in a position to do?but you did it and kept your cool. Most Impressive young Padwan
Yes. Its socialist to make people pay for their own rape kits. If anyone should check the dictionary its you. Or maybe check with a socialist. Try and learn what it really is before you go dropping scary names on people. Its the same as calling her "anti-american." It doesnt really mean anything
David, your response in this clip was so apropos I thought Chris Matthews was going to hand over his show to you then and there.
It is true that socialism is just a word and I would argue that you did not "drop" this word on Sarah Palin. After Heidi Harris accused Barack Obama of advocating socialist policies (socialism = Barack Obama = healthcare = not what America was founded on) you were in a difficult position.
Though we have socialized money, socialized education and socialized care for the elderly in this country right now, "socialism" remains as dangerous a label today as it was during the cold war.Then and there you could have abandoned your duty as a liberal thinker and allowed Heidi's pejorative use of the word "socialism" to go unchallenged.
Instead, you chose to stick to your guns. You invalidated Heidi's narrow application of the label "socialism" by listing social services currently provided by the federal government. Having established socialism as an existing part of our current government, you went a step further to combat Heidi's claim that "spreading the wealth around" is "not America" by explaining the wealth distribution system that Sarah Palin administered as the governor of Alaska. Sarah Palin was an appropriate example because no one doubts that she is American and the taxing system that sustains Alaska is the most characteristic example of "spreading the wealth around" that exists.
However, accusing the Republicans of not arguing the case "honestly" and telling Sarah Palin to read the constitution and the dictionary was in poor taste.
With that kind of media exposure you have the opportunity to really change minds. These Republicans throw enough dirt in their own faces, all we need to do is point and rub it in :)
Submitted by Simon Linskill (not verified) on Thu Oct. 23, 2008 6:41 AM PDT.
Good work David. I don't think I would have the patience to deal with such a volume of mis-information!
"as easy as shooting pit bulls in a barrel"
I know its a reference to her famous "hockey mom" line, but can we leave the pit bulls out of this? Their reputation is tarnished enough, and I'd prefer not to be left with the image of someone torturing my family pet.
Poor Heidi, President Bush's love for Big Oil did away with the Middle Class who is supposed to support the Upper Classes from having to pay higher taxes-Now the rich are going to have to be more "patriotic" and pay more taxes! It's unfair!-Next thing you know, the Hawks are going to have to pay for the wars they start to profit from and CEO's won't be able to give themselves big bonuses as the government will get most of them in taxes! What is America coming to? The Rich and Powerful run the world and set it up the way that profits them the most-That's the American Way!!
Great Clip
It would seem that a fundamental meaning in regards to the role of government no longer exists in the US. Thanks to Joe McCarthy the word "socialism" can be used as a swearword, but when this word is used in the context of being "anti-American" then it is obvious why American foreign policy fails so miserably.
Canada, Japan, South Korea and the EU all have socialist societies. These societies form to a high degree our most critical partners in business and in our defense thus when Bachman makes her anti-liberal statements she is doing far more than slamming 100 million voters in the US but she is also slamming almost a billion people to whom our system of defense is 100% dependent upon. From this perspective Bachman ought to be investigated in relation to attitudes that can be provably shown to undermine or threaten our national security. We need France. We need Germany. We need Great Britain and we need our good friends in South Korea and Japan but also we will discover that we need Russia and we need China and we need India and Brazil and so on and they need us.
The overriding majority of the world has adopted socialist strategies in regards to welfare because they offer a higher degree of humanness to the society as a whole. If you are sick shouldn't it be a right to be cared for? Apparently Bachman says no. She thinks that a third of the American public deserves to die abandoned in a back alleybut by god she will scream she is Pro-life.
The major difficulty with Republican arguments is that they too are socialistsbut that is what Bachman calls "un-American". Bachman calls wasting a trillion dollars on fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as pro-American. In other words Bachman who would not lift a finger to save a dying American from a sickness that required hospitalization to be cured (that f#cker can die) but she would willingly send American youths to die in some foreign country because the government there won't do for its people what she won't do for usI have to admit I do not understand her argument?
To further expand the Republican argument: Why should a single penny go to the military? Why should a single penny go to the CIA or other socialist programs? The Iraq War is a socialist funded war. If Americans want to fight such wars then if we follow the privatization is best arguments then private companies would have to win the support of the government to get permission to invade and private investors would have to evaluate whether the return on the investment would be worth the riskunder such conditions would private business have wagered one trillion on Iraq? I think not but socialists like Michele Bachman think that taxpayer's money should be used on wars that provably weaken national security and undermine the image of the US globally. She thinks that American's ought to use a sizable chunk of the taxpayer's money to undermine the constitution via anti-American legislation such as the Patriot Act or the new FISA and has the gall to call those who would defend the constitution liberals, leftists and anti-Americansshe even goes so far as to claim that these people are "terrorists or terrorist sympathizers". Like what a bitch! Michele Bachman is that type of socialist who under more critical conditions would simply be labeled a fascistshe believes the purpose of government is essentially to serve the corporation which puts her in line together with Mussolini.
I am really glad that David Corn pointed out in a masterly way the obvious socialist aspects of Hockey Mom Palin (and agreeing that this is a good use of taxes and a good tax strategy). Really great work and thanks for doing what I think millions of Americans would have liked to do but aren't in a position to dobut you did it and kept your cool. Most Impressive young Padwan
Submitted by capt (not verified) on Thu Oct. 23, 2008 12:50 PM PDT.
DC,
Looking and sounding good!
Tweety doesn't think it was all his fault? lol
McCain: "I've been tested"
Sure but learning diplomacy at the Hanoi Hilton isn't a plus in this day and age.
I never before had reason to question any major candidate's patriotism, even one whom I disagreed with, but of Governor Palin, I believe this is a legitimate issue.
She has spoken favorably of the goals of the secessionist Alaska Independence Party three times, most recently in 2008. Her husband was a member of the AIP for 7 years until very recently. This is a party whose founder said, "I am an Alaskan, not an American" and whose charter calls for separating from the United States. For a Governor to praise the goals of such a party should raise serious questions about her judgment and her ultimate loyalty to her country (America, not Alaska). Was she angling to be President of Alaska? Don't laugh; the Confederate States of America met extensively in party format before ultimately seceding from the Union. In addition, we share no border with Alaska, "America's only arctic state," as Ms. Palin put it to ABC's Charlie Gibson. Losing 1/5 of America's land mass, and its single largest supplier of oil, should not be taken lightly; thousands of members of the Alaska Independence Party don't.
As for racism, it might be helpful to know where she stands on the issue of whether she believes the world was created about 6,000 years ago, as described in the bible. Aside from being wildly scientific and irrational, such a belief also coincides with a belief that God created all the races in their present "pure" form, instead of all human beings having descended from a common racial ancestor, and then splitting off into the various races we see today. Many people who believe in the literal interpretation of the bible also do not believe the races should co-mingle, as Obama's parents did, since it is, in their view, against God's original design. This is directly relevant to Palin's views on race relations.
Ms Giannini,
I put up a thousand dollars to "buy" this election, at the rate of $25 to $100 a month.
Little people like me contributed funds they could barely afford, to give a candidate who wants to represent our best interests, a fighting chance.
Now that I see how it can work, I will continue to support candidates who represent my interests, with my vote and my wallet.
You can make all the snide implications you want about buying elections.
Submitted by Jassalasca Jape (not verified) on Sat Oct. 25, 2008 7:02 AM PDT.
Sam @ 8:22,
Try and learn what it really is before you go dropping scary names on people.It had occurred to me that there are problems for which collective ownership and similar solutions may be inefficient. But it had never occurred to me that "socialism" was something to be scared of. How ... timid.
I can see why you might think my comment was "snide". Its tone was a knee-jerk reaction to what I perceive as too pronounced of a bias in this post.
However, this journalist aside, the truth of my statement remains :Your candidate flipflopped on public financing which means he flipflopped on democracy. And that's HUGELY important. George Bush did the same thing: Buying an election with publicity space and press bias.
Your money contributed to the successive Glitzkriegs that my home state of Pennsylvania underwent both in the primary and now. Your candidate's campaign manager is hammering the population. That's how George Bush's campaign manager Karl Rove got another over-marketed under-experienced candidate like Obama elected first as governor of Texas and later as president.
Voters of the state of Pennsylvania have been recently the target of accusations of racism, press bias which is hardly spontaneous. There IS a strongly racially aligned vote in Pennsylvania, the vote of Pennsylvania's African American citizens, but -- due to your kind contributuions -- what comes out in the media is that it is the white citizens who don't want to vote Obama who are considered racist.
I have voted McKinney. So I can tell Axelrod and Obama and any of his supporters where to go if they accuse me of racism. I voted McKinney because of her strong continuous stand on Iraq. Obama 2002 lip service against the war in Iraq proves what to you? He has stated during his campaign that he'll go into Pakistan militarily and has urged the president of France-- the country where I presently live-- to send soldiers to Afghanistan where Obama intends to maintain and increase military presence even though history has proven that the country of Afghanistan is a losing battle (it contributed to the demise of the Soviet Union).
In addition, what's so incredibly unjust and ironic is that neither Sarkozy nor Obama have ever seen fighting themselves. None of Sarkozy's sons are in the military and Obama doesn't have any. So why do you support him when you know that he'll be sending other people's sons to war? Do you have sons?
Why are you voting for Obama when he has co-opted and totally deformed the opposition to the Iraq War?
Something no one ever seems to mention---that the rich with their extensive legal advisers seek out and utilize tax shelters or tax dodges that aren't available to us peons, and in the long run they usually end up paying much LESS income tax than we do, or in some cases NO tax at all. Yes, their tax rate may be higher than ours, but that doesn't necessarily translate to dollars sent to the IRS.
Heidi Harris is too stupid
Submitted by Caroll Johnston (not verified) on Mon Nov. 2, 2009 8:31 PM PST.
Heidi Harris is too stupid for be included in this group.
I think she's a man. I do. It's a drag queen.
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
