1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
So, the first definition sounds pretty much like our tax system. Collecting taxes. Redistributing or sharing, if you will. In the current climate no one would dare agree to that being true, but somehow on the day of his Inauguration, Barack will have us in a Socialist state. Okay maybe I'm exaggerating, but certainly in the first month, no doubt.
When Barack used the term "sharing the wealth" to that GOP tool "Joe the Plumber", he opened a can of worms that seems to have played into the sweaty hands of McCain at first glance. However, as is with the majority of his campaign thus far, he is speaking before checking the clear facts around him. Lucky for us, my lovely found this article today. Check out this clip from an article in The New Yorker:
For her part, Sarah Palin, who has lately taken to calling Obama “Barack the Wealth Spreader,” seems to be something of a suspect character herself. She is, at the very least, a fellow-traveller of what might be called socialism with an Alaskan face. The state that she governs has no income or sales tax. Instead, it imposes huge levies on the oil companies that lease its oil fields. The proceeds finance the government’s activities and enable it to issue a four-figure annual check to every man, woman, and child in the state. One of the reasons Palin has been a popular governor is that she added an extra twelve hundred dollars to this year’s check, bringing the per-person total to $3,269. A few weeks before she was nominated for Vice-President, she told a visiting journalist—Philip Gourevitch, of this magazine—that “we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.” Perhaps there is some meaningful distinction between spreading the wealth and sharing it (“collectively,” no less), but finding it would require the analytic skills of Karl the Marxist.
Sounds pretty "share the wealth"ey doesn't it? Taxing someone with money and spreading it around to those without. How about McCain's 2000 Hardball appearance about higher taxes for the wealthy in an exchange with a voter:
McCain replied that “wealthy people can afford more” and that “the very wealthy, because they can afford tax lawyers and all kinds of loopholes, really don’t pay nearly as much as you think they do.” The exchange continued:
YOUNG WOMAN: Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism and stuff?. . .
MCCAIN: Here’s what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there’s nothing wrong with paying somewhat more.
First of all, don't you think wife Cindy smacked his bald little head for that last comment? heehee just visualize that...
Secondly, it's yet another case of this campaign taking an idea, making it seems demonic to suit their purposes, and not bothering to check themselves first. The hypocrisy is astounding.
The next time someone brings up the whole scary wealth spreading socialist point to you, arm yourself with these two facts and fire away. Both are documented quotes from the candidates.
There are only a few days left to endure this crap. Arm yourself with facts. The other side only has poo.