Obama has had a very light legislative touch since he came into office — he could have a much heavier hand with things like health care reform, but has chose to largely stay at the sidelines. This behavior is the very opposite of that exhibited by the Bush administration.

Yes, I understand your point about socialism (or communism) as a philosophy vs. what has been put into application in various places.

So, now I know you do not want a socialist state. Back to my question about your passion for Obama and the course of this administration. Seeing this among many younger early career people I am just curious to understand the key attraction. I certainly understand the social justice issue, that is important to me to, what I don’t understand is the feeling that a stronger government, or a central planning elite, is more capable of achieving this. And are there other issues besides social justice?

Socialism is a philosophy about how to distribute certain parts of wealth generated by a group of people — it’s not a political system or even necessarily an economic system. The USSR was an abject dictatorship for much of its existence, as Cuba continues to be in some respects.

Many countries in Europe today have democratically elected leaders who decide to provide certain government services, such as health care, using the country’s money. The end results is often better and cheaper health care than as is the case in the US.

Why do you think i have a “strong believe in the bible” just because I quoted an excerpt from it?

And I guess it also depends on your definition of disaster. Socialism is another form of utopianism which is based on hope and faith that man is good and perfectible through education. It has always lead to an autocratic and oppressive government because there are no men (or women) who are good and will actually serve rather than amass power. It is the same problem we are having except that our form of government is better suited, it was designed to recognize the inherent nature of man and institute checks and balances to retard the effects of bad men. We certainly have grave problems but I think it is because of the nature of man not the system essentially (improvements can always be made). What Obama and this regime aim for, it appears, is a restructuring that is like most other socialist revolutions – let us who know best take care of you who know nothing. Thus freedom is exchanged for security or so goes the promise. The reality is that freedom and security vanish.

May I ask what places you see as successful socialist states? Also, I see from your Nov 2004 post that you have a strong belief in the bible. May I ask if you consider yourself an orthodox Christian, believing in the authority of the bible, the virgin birth, the substitutionary atonement of Christ etc.?

Yes, I’m still glad. Unfortunately we are in a 2 party system, so we have to vote for the lesser of 2 weak candidates, and I am very glad that Obama won instead of McCain.

Socialism has actually succeeded wildly in essentially all of the places it has been implemented — certainly in the last 50 years.

Do you have an example of a country where socialism has been a disaster?

That said, if everyone in the US who made less than 250k gave the obama campaign $20, he would have the most money, so that’s still pretty democratic.

Maybe in the next election I will quit all my projects and spend 10 months going door to door with a high-pressure spiel convincing each household to shell out… $20.