December 23, 2010
If Barack Obama Is a Socialist Then You Are One Too
Even if Stanley Kurtz is right, Barack Obama is not, and was never, a socialist.
By which I mean, Barack Obama wasn't a socialist even if, as a young man, he thought he was.
At Slate, Dave Weigel reviews Kurtz's Radical in Chief, which makes a case that Obama's intellectual roots are determinedly socialist, and concludes this of the president:
He's a liberal, but he knows who he needs to impress and what they care about. He figured out early on what soothed Hyde Park socialists, and later he figured out how to win over Springfield and Washington Republicans. He's not an unblinking, unrepentant socialist. He's a liberal political hack. He's just been good at knowing how much everyone else likes to obsess over labels.
Jonah Goldberg responds in good faith, asking, "What's the difference?": "Is there anything fundamental to social democracy that Nancy Pelosi (forget Obama for the moment) disagrees with because she is a liberal and not a 'socialist'? Is there anything Nancy Pelosi believes about the role of the state that would cause the average Swedish or British social democrat to object?"
Click Here to read the entire article at U.S. News and World Report.