I never said or even implied:

Conservativism never fails. It can only be failed (by those who fail to live up to its ideals).

Please don’t put words in my mouth. I have never done that with you, and it really lessens the impact of your point.

Conservatism often fails. But the failure to achieve one of its goals is not necessarily the fault of conservatives. It may be, as you imply, the failure of people to live up to its ideals, or, it may be that it’s not a reasonable goal, or it may be simply that Americans really don’t want small government.

Or it may be even simpler. Republicans aren’t Conservatives and don’t claim to be. They claim to hold some/many of their beliefs, but not all. That’s why there is a Conservative party in the United States (although you rarely hear about it). So, I’m often forced to vote for the next best thing, but I know that I may not be voting for someone who is truly a conservative. The same is true if you are a Marxist. Yes, there is the CPUSA, and they occasionally field candidates, and occasionally these candidates or the ones they endorse actually win. But, often, if you are a Communist and want to vote for someone who will promote that agenda, then you will have to choose another option.

Please don’t ever put words in my mouth again. Sorry to harp on it, but I really can’t express how insulting I found your post to be.

And, if you’re going to use the epithet, “socialist” to denote anyone to the left of you on the political spectrum, you have rendered that term analytically useless, too.

Obama isn’t even particularly “left-wing”. His Senate voting record is well to the right of Hillary Clinton’s. (But I’ll be the first to admit that’s probably not a very good metric for judging someone’s policies as a Presidential candidate. Compare Obama with, say, Lyndon Johnson, and I think you’ll see the latter as someone considerably more willing to move the country leftward.)

And conservatives didn’t blow it on small government. Republicans did. Quite a difference.

Conservativism never fails. It can only be failed (by those who fail to live up to its ideals).

Sounds just like that other Co****ism.

Unfortunately.

So, I’ll keep my credibility on that, thank you very much.

First, you take a ridiculously narrow definition of socialism that deals with one of Marx’s ten planks, and want me to use that as the only metric of whether someone promotes a socialist agenda. Then, that not being enough for you, you bring into the discussion European politics and ask me to justify a statement that I never made, that Obama is to the left of them, or even as far left as them. No thanks. I won’t defend your ridiculous statements. If you want someone to defend them, you’ll have to do that yourself.

It’s highly irrelevant where Obama’s policies fit in regards to European politics. I have not stated that Obama wants to turn the U.S. into a communist state in his first 100 days in office or anything ridiculous like that. I have merely stated factually that Obama’s views and policies are socialistic in nature. Or, simply put, an Obama Presidency would bring the country closer to being a socialistic state than it is now.

For the record, I don’t care if you support a socialist or someone who espouses socialistic policies. I don’t care if you support a fascist, or a racist, or a free marketeer or a communist. I don’t care if you support little green men from Mars. For now, it’s still a mostly free country, and you have the right to back whatever candidate you choose for whatever reasons you like. And, I will support those rights until my dying breath.

But, ignoring the truth, or misrepresenting it is foolish and dangerous.

So, support his socialistic ideas if you wish, but know and acknowledge what it is that you’re supporting.

Anyway, as I said, I won’t defend your ridiculous and irrelevant statements. I will defend mine, however, and have already.

If it walks like duck, and quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck, etc…

As for small government, give it a rest. Conservatives had their chance and they manifestly blew it. You have zero credibility on that measure.

Still, I’ll give you one more chance. Show me an example of how Obama’s agenda is “purely socialist”. Find me one instance where he openly advocates collective or government control of the means of production. Does he think Congress should be in charge of manufacturing cars and computers? Or, if you prefer Marxism, find me an example of Obama openly advocating the revolution of the proletariat. I am going to insist that words have meaning, so I want some evidence that Obama is somehow to the left of European social democracy, because socialism surely is. Failing that, which I’m sure you will, how about evidence that Obama is even as far left as European social democrats? Since he isn’t, that will also be difficult for you. But then again, you aren’t interested in actually debating anything. You’re just here to label everything to the left of the American center “socialist”, as if calling something socialism is a rational substitute for argument.

I think if you can’t see that he’s a Marxist/socialist, then you probably shouldn’t be allowed to vote in November.

Fargus,
I’m not asserting anything. I am merely pointing out as always, that the statements that the Clinton campaign has been making are true. I pointed out that they’d start making them long before they ever did, and I’ve been right on every count. I’ve called every state correctly, with the exception of thinking that Indiana would have a much larger margin of victory for her than it did. Now, how exactly have I been delusional?

“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion” – Barack Obama, April 2008
“Religion is the opiate of the masses”, Karl Marx, 1843

The Trinity United Church espouses Black Liberation Theology – well known to be Marxist in nature, see Black Liberation Theology and Marxism

Obama says that the well-known Marxist, Frank Marshall Davis was a “decisive influence” on him. This is in his book and and has been documented by the Communist Party USA.

Each of you will have the chance to make your own discovery in the years to come. And I say “chance” because you won’t have to take it. There’s no community service requirement in the real world; no one forcing you to care. You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should by. You can choose to narrow your concerns and live your life in a way that tries to keep your story separate from America’s.

But I hope you don’t. Not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, though you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all those who helped you get here, though you do have that debt.

It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation. Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition. Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you’ll play in writing the next great chapter in America’s story.

– Barack Obama, May 2008

Those are pretty words, and somehow uplifting in the “it takes a village” meme of uplifting, but the translation is simple. “Put away your childish thoughts of the American Dream. Serve the larger community. Share with the larger community.” Community is a big word in Marxism.

When running for state senate in 1996, Barack Obama sought and obtained the endorsement of the Democratic Socialists of America. In case you don’t know who they are, I’ll quote from their website: “The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. DSA’s members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics.”

So, he sought and received the endorsement of a group that wants to establish an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics.

And, if you can stomach it, I highly suggest you read his entire “Blueprint for Change”, which is better described as a “Blueprint for Socialism”. I don’t need to quote from it. It speaks for itself.

Ryan, you’ve posted some crazy things here, and some things that are quite intelligent. But, if you can’t see that Barack Obama has a purely socialist agenda, then you’re living in Fantasyland. Now, if that’s ok with you, and you want a socialist agenda, that’s fine. You have that right. But don’t delude yourself into thinking that this man supports capitalism, free enterprise, small government or the individual.

You can’t assert that if the contests were winner-take-all, or if the popular vote were the metric, that Obama would have run the exact same campaign. That makes those scenarios explicitly not worth mentioning.

She lost by the only measure that counts, and refused to admit it. There is something admirable in a no-quit attitude, but sooner or later refusing to acknowledge reality indicates delusion.